On 5/8/07, A.J.Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Edward L. Fox wrote:
> On 5/7/07, A.J.Mechelynck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>> You're not the first; there seems to have been a f*ckup in the svn commit
>> lately. I suggest you scrap your existing 7.1a sources and restart from
>> scratch, by downloading the 7.1a.000 sources then applying the
>> 7.1a.001 patch.
>> Here are the files whose download I recommend:
>>
>> 1) the unpatched archives
>> http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/unstable/unix/vim-7.1a.tar.bz2
>> http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/unstable/extra/vim-7.1a-extra.tar.gz
>> http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/unstable/extra/vim-7.1a-lang.tar.gz
>>
>> The first one is not a typo: even for Windows, I recommend the *Unix*
>> + extra
>> + lang sources. Together, they have exactly one copy of every source file
>> needed to compile Vim for *any* platform including Windows.
>>
>> Unpack them on top of each other at what will become your Vim
>> directory "for
>> compiling", maybe something like D:\build\vim : they will create a
>> subfolder
>> "vim71a" and place all the sources in it, creating subfolders as needed.
>>
>> I don't know if you have a bz2 decompresser program, or if your
>> version of
>> "patch" will accept the patch format. In both cases, MinGW may or may not
>> offer the necessary packages (look there first) but I know Cygwin
>> does. (Even
>> WinZip knows about the .tar and .gz formats.)
>>
>> 2) the patch
>> http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/unstable/patches/7.1a/7.1a.001
>>
>> Download it (and optionally its sibling files README MD5 and MD5SUMS)
>> into a
>> newly-created subfolder named (in my example)
>> D:\build\vim\vim71a\patches then
>> apply it by using (IIUC)
>>
>> D:
>> cd \build\vim\vim70
>> patch -p0 <patches\7.1a.001
>>
>
> Could you please tell me the differences between svn repository and
> your downloaded and patched sources? In fact #262 is a broken
> committing because the patch 7.1a.001 was applied to 7.0.243, so the
> svn sources are broken. But #263 is just synced from the cvs
> repository. So if it is broken, so is cvs.
>
>> See details at
>> http://users.skynet.be/antoine.mechelynck/vim/compile.htm but
>> replace everywhere the directory name .../vim70/... by .../vim71a/...,
>> even in
>> the name of what will become your "production" 7.1a $VIMRUNTIME after
>> compiling and installing.
[...]
My downloaded and patched sources (from the ftp repository, thus bypassing
both cvs and svn) are Bram's official 7.1a.000 full sources and Bram's
official 7.1a.001 patch. If (as you're saying) the svn repository mistakenly
applied the 7.1a.001 patch against the 7.0.243 sources, by doing as I suggest
you won't make that error. And I don't know whether or not the CVS repository
is broken, but AFAIK the FTP uploads are made directly under Bram's own
responsibility, and IIUC those aren't broken (but they're incremental: you got
to apply the patches yourself).
I've already downloaded the ftp version and applied the patch. And in
my previous post I gave out the diff information between the ftp
version and the svn version. In fact nearly every file is the same
except the cvs version tags. spellfile.vim is different but the svn
version is much more "fresh". And ftp version even has some unused
folders and files such as CVS directory. So... I don't think I need to
commit my patched ftp version into svn repository. Any suggestions?
Best regards,
Tony.
--
If you give Congress a chance to vote on both sides of an issue, it
will always do it.
-- Les Aspin, D., Wisconsin
