[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#444462: updated patch



This seems to work.

I left last_successful_item in, since it's still needed to allow
skipping past menu items, and I understand how the seen_items hash is
supposed to be used now.

Index: debian/changelog
===================================================================
--- debian/changelog	(revision 49361)
+++ debian/changelog	(working copy)
@@ -7,8 +7,13 @@
   * Fix a memory leak in show_main_menu().  (Closes: #438121)
     Thanks to Masami Ichikawa for the patch!
 
- -- Jérémy Bobbio <lunar@debian.org>  Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:04:39 +0200
+  [ Joey Hess ]
+  * Fix test for new menu items that come before the last successful item.
+    It's ok to jump up the menu to run such new items. Closes: #444462
+  * Fix NEVERDEFAULT test. Closes: #277743
 
+ -- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org>  Fri, 28 Sep 2007 18:47:20 -0400
+
 main-menu (1.20) unstable; urgency=low
 
   * Remove rather redundant extended description of main menu question.
Index: main-menu.c
===================================================================
--- main-menu.c	(revision 49361)
+++ main-menu.c	(working copy)
@@ -139,12 +139,15 @@
 			//di_log(DI_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG, "not menu item; or not installed");
 			continue;
 		}
-		if ((p->installer_menu_item < last_successful_item &&
-		     !di_hash_table_lookup(seen_items, &p->p.key)) &&
-		    p->installer_menu_item < NEVERDEFAULT) {
+		if (p->installer_menu_item >= NEVERDEFAULT) {
 			//di_log(DI_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG, "not in range to be default");
 			continue;
 		}
+		if (p->installer_menu_item < last_successful_item &&
+		    di_hash_table_lookup(seen_items, &p->p.key)) {
+			//di_log(DI_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG, "menu item is before last_successful_item, and is not new");
+			continue;
+		}
 		/* If menutest says this item should be default, make it so */
 		if (!isdefault(p)) {
 			//di_log(DI_LOG_LEVEL_DEBUG, "isdefalt says no");

-- 
see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: