On Wed, 2011-02-16 at 22:38 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > Hi Guilherme, > > > It was broken because it was using 'ls -l' as the input for the while loop, > > which means the file modes, owner and times ended up together with the file > > names themselves. > > That's a '1' (one), not an 'l'. Removing it will break the script.
Oops, that should teach me to copy and paste things when I'm trying to reproduce them in a separate shell. I actually ran the script after removing it and it didn't break, but I'll add it back. > > > I also changed it to use parsemail.sh instead of parsemail.py as the former > > sets the required environment variables that were being set in > > parsemail-batch.sh. > > Makes sense. > > > --- a/apps/patchwork/bin/parsemail-batch.sh > > +++ b/apps/patchwork/bin/parsemail-batch.sh > > @@ -19,7 +19,7 @@ > > # along with Patchwork; if not, write to the Free Software > > # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 > > USA > > > > -PATCHWORK_BASE="/srv/patchwork" > > +HERE=`dirname $0` > > Maybe call this PATCHWORK_BINDIR, so it's a little more obvious what to > replace this with if they move one of the scripts? Sure, I'll change it. Now my question is: should I start a new thread with a v2 patch or is it preferred that I pass this one to send-email when sending the next version of the patch? Cheers, -- Guilherme Salgado <https://launchpad.net/~salgado>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Patchwork mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/patchwork
