Hi,
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 08:33:22PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
/usr/sbin/pkg_version Jeremy Lea [EMAIL PROTECTED] - re
OK, the first revision is attached. It appears to work for me... It
needs some spit and polish, and probably a few more people to test.
I've not implemented the -d flag
OK, the first revision is attached. It appears to work for me... It
needs some spit and polish, and probably a few more people to test.
I've not implemented the -d flag since it sort of became unneeded, and
it's not really the way things are done in the rest of pkg_*. I've also
not
Jeremy Lea wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 08:33:22PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
/usr/sbin/pkg_version Jeremy Lea [EMAIL PROTECTED] - re
OK, the first revision is attached. It appears to work for me... It
needs some spit and polish, and probably a few more people to test.
I've
Hi,
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:19:29PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
+++ version/perform.c 14 May 2002 12:41:41 -
[...]
+ strlcpy(tmp, PORTS_DIR, PATH_MAX);
+ strlcat(tmp, /INDEX, PATH_MAX);
I'd suggest snprintf(3)
Yeah. Like I said, it needs a bit of polishing. I
Jeremy Lea wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 04:19:29PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
+++ version/perform.c 14 May 2002 12:41:41 -
[...]
+ strlcpy(tmp, PORTS_DIR, PATH_MAX);
+ strlcat(tmp, /INDEX, PATH_MAX);
I'd suggest snprintf(3)
Yeah. Like I said, it
On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 02:50:39PM +0200, Jeremy Lea wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 08:33:22PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
/usr/sbin/pkg_version Jeremy Lea [EMAIL PROTECTED] - re
OK, the first revision is attached. It appears to work for me... It
needs some spit and polish,
If memory serves me right, Jeremy Lea wrote:
On Thu, May 09, 2002 at 08:33:22PM +0100, Mark Murray wrote:
/usr/sbin/pkg_version Jeremy Lea [EMAIL PROTECTED] - re
OK, the first revision is attached. It appears to work for me... It
needs some spit and polish, and probably a few more
