ptrubey@clan.UUCP (Phil Trubey) (12/11/87)
Almost... Patch 14 has a small bug in it for those systems that
do not have the MKDIRSUB #define defined. According to the defs.c
comments you are supposed to define this *if* your system has a mkdir()
system call. Most System V Unix do not have this as a system call,
so this is usually left undefined. This is used in the file funcs.c
where an alternate mkdir() is coded. Unfortunately, Patch #14 enclosed this
mkdir() procedure with
#ifdef MKDIRSUB
instead of
#ifndef MKDIRSUB
I did the following diff of my two files to get the offsets...
(by the way, how does one generate patch's from two different files?)
File: funcs.c
523c523
< #ifdef MKDIRSUB
---
> #ifndef MKDIRSUB
Another question - this is *not* meant to be sarcastic: Do the news
maintainers have access to a System V machine to test out their
patches before sending them out?
Phil Trubey
School of Computer Science, Carleton University
CDNnet: phil@scs.carleton.cdn
BITNET: ptrubey@carleton.bitnet
UUCP: ptrubey@scs.uucp ( ..!watmath!clan!scs!phil)jhc@mtune.ATT.COM (Jonathan Clark) (12/19/87)
In article <337@clan.UUCP> ptrubey@clan.UUCP (Phil Trubey) writes: >Another question - this is *not* meant to be sarcastic: Do the news >maintainers have access to a System V machine to test out their >patches before sending them out? As of this last release, yes. I found two bugs which were fixed before Rick sent out the patches. Unfortunately nobody created any new articles in the time when I was beta'ing the code, hence the MKDIRSUB business slipped through - actually I hadn't noticed it until I read the article! -- Jonathan Clark jhc@mtune.att.com, attmail!jonathan The Englishman never enjoys himself except for some noble purpose.