On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 at 20:15:09 +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Carlos R. Mafra escribió: > > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 at 19:47:28 +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012, Carlos R. Mafra escribió: > > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 at 19:09:39 +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Because I created the bug, I will make the patch. > > > > > > > > Your previous patch is only on #next, I will kick it out and > > > > the bug you created will be gone. > > > > > > Please, > > > > > > don't drop it. Wait a minute. > > > > > > We only need think about the new folder. Then, change two lines. If you > > > want, I can send a trasitional patch to avoid the problem while we think > > > the directory. > > > > > > I changed these lines in the menu-method files: > > > > > > -rootprefix="/etc/X11/WindowMaker/" > > > +rootprefix="/etc/GNUstep/Defaults" > > > > > > We can change it to /usr/share/WindowMaker while we discuss about the new > > > directory. > > > > But why do you want a new directory in the first place? > > WindowMaker (upstream) only uses one folder in /etc. IMO this is ok (but I am > not sure if /etc/GNUstep is correct). Anyway, debian uses tow folders; > /etc/GNUstep, with the same files that upstream, and /etc/X11/WindowMaker > with stuff duplicated,.. (see the commit info, is very detailed). For this > reason, I removed the X11/WindowMaker folder. The problem is the menu.hook > file, a file generated from the /usr/share/menu/ application files. > > This file must be in any place that WindowMaker can search it. See my > previous mail. IMO the /etc/X11/WindowMaker folder can be removed from search > path the upstream version (see the mail again). > > > > I spent a lot of time on this patch. > > > > Nothing will be lost. What I meant is that I can drop the patch and > > you provide the replacement without the change which breaks things. > > > > You have your patch on your own tree. Assuming it's your current > > last patch, you can do this. > > > > * edit your tree to fix the bug > > * commit a new patch > > * rebase your tree to merge the last two patches (the big > > one which broke things and your fix on top of it) > > git rebase -i HEAD~2 > > and follow the instructions > > > > After that you will have only one patch, and it will > > be without the bug. So you send that one again. > > > > Or, just send the fix on top of that to me and I'll > > do the task above. > > I know, but... :'-( > > patch is attached. What should I do?
Thanks for the patch. I rebased the #next branch now to put your fix on top of the offending patch. Take a look at the result and see if there is anything else you want to do. -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
