On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Eric Miller wrote:
> Hugh Sasse wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Mar 2009, Eric Miller wrote: > > > > > > > > Did my patch work, then? > > [...] > > > > > > > > > I have to be honest. I haven't tried it yet because I didn't have time at > > > work > > > to learn how to apply patches. I'm a newbie to Linux development. I will > > > tonight and let you know. > > > > > > > That's OK, it took me a while to learn as well. The patch program is > > pretty robust and will tell you if it gets upset. > > > > cd bloopaphone > > # You will need to be above the c directory, i.e, the top of the git > > # tree > > patch < bloopaphone_patch_untested > > > > Should basically do the job. If that doesn't work, play with the -p > > option to patch, which tells it how many directories to prune off the > > front of the paths in the patch. -p0 or -p1 and so forth. > > > > Patch (not sun's patch as per Solaris 9 and before, but GNU patch) should > > detect if you are applying a patch to something already patched, or if > > it just makes no sense. The patch that Sun shipped was probably some > > variant of Larry Wall's original program, but he recommends GNU patch > > (when I last looked at his page anyway). Theirs wouln't cope with unified > > context diffs. > > > > One customarily (nowadays) generate patches with > > diff -u orig new > > or in this case since I was doing a diff against the repository git diff -u > > > > This gives a unified diff as opposed to the traditional patches which used < > > and > to indicate lines from first and second file. It also has some lines > > of context to help patch cope with badly aligned > > patches. > > > > Oh, I wrote some blurb about this somwhere.... > > Well, not so much as I thought, basically links to > > http://www.gnu.org/software/patch/patch.html > > http://www.gnu.org/software/diffutils/manual/html_node/Making-Patches.html#Making%20Patches > > Which is most of what one needs to know. > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > HTH > > Hugh > > > > > > > Hugh, > > It didn't like the patch. Here's the compiler output: But the patch itself was not malformed? .../bin/patch accepted it OK? > > gcc -I. -c -obin/main.o -Wall -I/usr/include -I/usr/include/cairo > -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/freetype2 -I/usr/include/libpng12 > -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include > -I/usr/lib/ruby/1.8/i486-linux -DVIDEO -O -DSHOES_GTK -fPIC > -I/usr/include/gtk-2.0 -I/usr/lib/gtk-2.0/include -I/usr/include/atk-1.0 > -I/usr/include/cairo -I/usr/include/pango-1.0 -I/usr/include/glib-2.0 > -I/usr/lib/glib-2.0/include -I/usr/include/pixman-1 -I/usr/include/freetype2 > -I/usr/include/libpng12 -I/usr/include/vlc/plugins bin/main.c > gcc -Ldist -o dist/shoes-bin bin/main.o -lruby1.8 -lpng -lcairo > -lpangocairo-1.0 -lungif -ljpeg -lrt -lvlc -L/usr/lib -lcairo -lpango-1.0 > -lgobject-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lshoes -L. -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions > -rdynamic -Wl,-export-dynamic > echo 'LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$APPPATH $APPPATH/shoes-bin "$@"' >> dist/shoes > In file included from c/notation.rl:13: > bloopsaphone.h:95: error: expected ';', ',' or ')' before '*' token The only * on that line is unigned long, const PaStreamCallbackTimeInfo *, which looks OK to me. 92 int bloops_is_done(bloops *); 93 static void bloops_synth(int, float*); 94 static int bloops_port_callback(const void *, void *, 95 unsigned long, const PaStreamCallbackTimeInfo *, 96 PaStreamCallbackFlags, void *); 97 bloopsatrack *bloops_track(bloops *, bloopsaphone *, char *, int); 98 bloopsatrack *bloops_track2(bloops *, bloopsaphone *, char *) ; 99 char *bloops_track_str(bloopsatrack *); 100 float bloops_note_freq(char, int); is how mine looks now. I've removed one word after PaStreamCallbackFlags on line 96 before writing this email, but that shouldn't affect remarks about * I'm a bit stuck now. > make: *** [notation.o] Error 1 > strip -x dist/*.so.* > strip -x dist/*.so > > Hugh
