[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Bug#353911: md5sum --check checks only if _all_ are bad
From: |
Patrick Schoenfeld |
Subject: |
Re: Bug#353911: md5sum --check checks only if _all_ are bad |
Date: |
Thu, 10 Dec 2009 15:17:48 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
Hi,
I just realized that this is still open. Unfortunately
in the meanwhile I lost the git checkout in which I worked
on this, so I had to merge the changes from the borked
patch I sent to the mailing list.
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 03:36:53PM +0100, Jim Meyering wrote:
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg14650.html
> >>
> >> I was waiting for an updated patch, but
> >> as far as I can see, that never reached the list.
> >
> > I think I did. I sent it in an own mail as outlined in one of your
> > documents:
> >
> > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-coreutils/2008-11/msg00107.html
>
> Ah, yes. Thanks.
> Different thread.
>
> If it's no trouble, would you please rebase and re-post it to the
> mailing list as an attachment or using a mail client that doesn't
> mangle patches? At least two lines have been split, and that renders
> the patch non-applicable. I could join them manually, but...
The attached patch is rebased against the current master branch
(last commit: bb4cb10e89607437154d84b47b9f93869a9484b7)
Note, that my assignment is active, so it should be okay to
include it, if you accept it from a technical pov.
> Finally, in this block, please correct the inconsistent indentation:
>
> + if (pedantic & !do_check)
> + {
> + error (0, 0,
> + _("the --pedantic option is meaningful only when verifying
> checksums"));
> + usage (EXIT_FAILURE);
> + }
I'm not exactly sure what you mean and weither I did it right in the new
version of the patch. Indenting like it is done in coreutils is really
weird with vim IMHO. But with
cinoptions=>4,n-2,{2,^-2,:2,=2,g0,h2,p5,t0,+2,(0,u0,w1,m1
shiftwidth=2
tabstop=8
it at leasts looks right (as in: consistent with the other option
checks) in vim.
> Hmm.. re NEWS, maybe it's not worth it, since adding a new feature,
> even one this small, in a bug-fix-only release (upcoming 7.2) is
> not the best idea. Since it'll have to go into the to-be-created
> section for 7.3.
I have ommitted the NEWS entry for now. If it should get back,
please clarify whats actually needd.
And please remember that I asked you to write the test case, back
when I wrote the patch originally. The test cases I've tested are
still the same as in my mail as linked above.
Best Regards,
Patrick
353911.patch
Description: Text Data
- Re: Bug#353911: md5sum --check checks only if _all_ are bad,
Patrick Schoenfeld <=