Re: [ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-14 Thread Volker Quetschke
Hi! I'm preparing the gnupg 1.2.1 version right now, and I like the packaging with the signed files :-), but I found a few problems in the script: ... I found another one: all) prep && conf && build && install && \ strip && pkg && name=$0 text="SCRIPT" sigfile && spkg && \ finish &&

Re: Signed scripts and packages [Was: [ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2]

2002-11-10 Thread Volker Quetschke
Hi, >> 2. text=... is set, but never used. > text is used in sigfile() to print which file must be signed: > > echo "$text signature need to be updated"; \ Oops, I was blind :-) Bye Volker -- PGP/GPG key (ID: 0x9F8A785D) available from wwwkeys.de.pgp.net key-fingerprint 550D F17E B

Signed scripts and packages [Was: [ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2]

2002-11-09 Thread Lapo Luchini
1. I had to put some variables in quotes, otherwise you get problems with "if [ ... ]" when the variable is not set. E.g without SIG=1 Ok. 2. text=... is set, but never used. text is used in sigfile() to print which file must be signed: echo "$text signature need to be updated"; \

Re: [ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-09 Thread Volker Quetschke
Hi, Lapo Luchini wrote: 3 build script updated to support digital signatures 4 source package now contains original's package detached gpg signature by the author and detached signatures on the script itself and on the patch, signed by me 5 signatures can be checked with "./rsync-2.5.5-2.sh c

Re: [PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-06 Thread Lapo Luchini
1) http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/2002-10/msg00354.html 2) not a single complaint about rsync after 1.3.13 was released I received a couple of "complaints" direct in my e-mail, I will ask them to check wich version did they use, the report here. -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-06 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Wed, Nov 06, 2002 at 04:39:36PM +0100, Pavel Tsekov wrote: >On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Lapo Luchini wrote: >> Christopher Faylor wrote: >>>So, I am always against these hand waving "works for me" patches that >>>people like to provide as in 2 below. >>> >>I feel the same against this kind of "hacks", t

Re: [PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-06 Thread Pavel Tsekov
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Christopher Faylor wrote: > > >So, I am always against these hand waving "works for me" patches that > >people like to provide as in 2 below. > > > I feel the same against this kind of "hacks", that's why I asked to put > in in "test"...in the meantime we

Re: [PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-05 Thread Lapo Luchini
Christopher Faylor wrote: So, I am always against these hand waving "works for me" patches that people like to provide as in 2 below. I feel the same against this kind of "hacks", that's why I asked to put in in "test"...in the meantime we can solve the real problem. -- Lapo 'Raist' Luchini [

Re: [PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-05 Thread Christopher Faylor
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 11:03:22AM +0100, Pavel Tsekov wrote: >What should we do with this package ? It has been almost two weeks since >Lapo posted it and there isn't a single comment. Is it ok to be >uploaded ? Well, I think my opinion is pretty consistent. Rather than say signal delivery in c

[PING][ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-11-05 Thread Pavel Tsekov
What should we do with this package ? It has been almost two weeks since Lapo posted it and there isn't a single comment. Is it ok to be uploaded ? On Fri, 25 Oct 2002, Lapo Luchini wrote: > Ready at the same usual address: > http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.5-2.tar.bz2 > http://www.lapo.it/tmp/r

[ANN] Updated: rsync-2.5.5-2

2002-10-25 Thread Lapo Luchini
Ready at the same usual address: http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.5-2.tar.bz2 http://www.lapo.it/tmp/rsync-2.5.5-2-src.tar.bz2 Revision changelog: 1 Compiled with gcc version 3.2 20020818 (prerelease) 2 Included Anthony Heading's patch to avoid dead child processes http://sources.redhat.com/ml/c