On 09/02/09 02:01, pansz wrote:
> Martin Kopta 写道:
>> What the hell did you do?! Arghhhhh!! My scripts now does not work and
>> I have to do some hacks like when the bad patch occured in 7.1
>> patches. Damn you who did this!
>>
> All patches should pass the vim test suite. So the "bad patch" passed it.
>
> If you has a test case which should fail the "bad patch", you're welcome
> to contribute the test case to vim.

What the OP calls "the bad patch" is any cumulative patch, as 
7.2.001-100.gz (which recapitulates 7.2.001 to 7.2.100) as opposed to 
7.2.102 (which is a "single" patch). Apparently he has written a 
patching script which doesn't take the possible existence of cumulative 
patches into account.

Best regards,
Tony.
-- 
Imagine that Cray computer decides to make a personal computer.  It has
a 150 MHz processor, 200 megabytes of RAM, 1500 megabytes of disk
storage, a screen resolution of 4096 x 4096 pixels, relies entirely on
voice recognition for input, fits in your shirt pocket and costs $300.
What's the first question that the computer community asks?

"Is it PC compatible?"

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to