Re: Patch for smail
On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 09:49:00AM +0100, Paul Slootman wrote:
> On Wed 27 Jan 1999, Bart Warmerdam wrote:
>
> > I patched smail for alignments errors and send the patch to the maintainer.
>
> Hmm, you should have sent the patch to the BTS, that way there is some
> form of record that you did it. Now he could claim he never received
> it, if he wanted to be evil :-)
>
Nope, he can't deny it... I wrongly suspected a poroblem in libc and talked to
chris as well. When I notified the maintainer I cc.-ed chris as well. The
patch I've suggested is not the exactely I send him. There are some
adjustments to make them compatible for x86 (no change there).
> > Since I got no response this month I think he is not going to incorporate it
> > for us. Do you think I should do a binary-only NMU and send the patch to BTS
> > or wait until the maintainer picks up on this (eventually sending a bug when
> > he still doesn't respond)??
>
> I'd do a sourceful NMU, if the maintainer hasn't responded for a
> month... Be kind and also upload an i386 version if you can :-)
I'll send the patch to BTS (incl a bug), do a source-full NMU with i386
included. I hope to do it tonight but am not sure i have the time...
Thanks,
B.
NB: There are also a lot of alignment traps in gs. I am looking into these as
well. If I have a solution I will come back on this.
Reply to: