Re: gpart FTBFS
On Sat, 2012-01-28 at 11:25:27 +0530, harish badrinath wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Guillem Jover <guillem@debian.org> wrote:
> > The proposed patch also fixes the endian issues as stated on the bug
> > report.
> The patch attached by Samuel Thibault is a diff of a diff.
> The unmodified file is a file named debian/patches/01-conglomeration.patch.
That the patched file is a patch itself does not really matter, you
just need to apply the patch and that should do the right thing, as
once inside the extracted source package: «patch -p0 <patch».
> I have worked on essentially breaking down the 01-conglomeration patch
> into manageable chunks.
>
> The only difference i see between the patch attached and the actual
> patch 01-conglomeration.patch is given in my previous mail.
>
> After applying the diff detailed in my previous mail, gpart does not
> build because, a file in the source named gm_ntfs.h cannot find
> asm/byteorder.h (I could not find it too, that may be because i have a
> lot to learn).
Yes as mentioned, the diff you posted is only a part of the needed
changes that Samuel provided to make it build. The part that I don't
understand though is that the current source package in Debian unstable
is 0.1h-11, which contains the 01-conglomeration.patch file Samuel
patched against, you say you are splitting that into smaller chunks
(as the new maintainer perhaps?), so then I pressume you should have
moved the <asm/byteorder.h> chunks to another patch, which should be
modified instead.
If you have taken over as the new maintainer the current Vcs-Git field
is not working, so a new URL would be nice to understand what's your
actual issue. Otherwise applying Samuel's patch first, and then
splitting 01-conglomeration.patch would be the wiser thing to do.
thanks,
guillem
Reply to: