Bug#457961: Fwd: Dillo failing to unpatch
----- Forwarded message from "Nelson A. de Oliveira" <naoliv@debian.org> -----
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 03:15:30 -0200
From: "Nelson A. de Oliveira" <naoliv@debian.org>
To: Nicolas Valcárcel <nvalcarcel@gmail.com>
Cc: Patrick Schoenfeld <schoenfeld@in-medias-res.com>
Subject: Dillo failing to unpatch
Hi Nicolas!
About your message on debian-qa [1], probably you are talking about [2],
right?
Well, indeed it's failing to unpatch on the second run and the probable
guiltys are:
(...)
patching file config.guess
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 53.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 106.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 203.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 227.
Hunk #6 FAILED at 245.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 319.
Hunk #8 FAILED at 342.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 755.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 778.
Hunk #11 FAILED at 789.
Hunk #12 FAILED at 804.
Hunk #13 FAILED at 827.
Hunk #14 FAILED at 917.
Hunk #15 succeeded at 1004 with fuzz 2 (offset 27 lines).
Hunk #16 FAILED at 1109.
Hunk #17 FAILED at 1209.
Hunk #18 FAILED at 1227.
Hunk #19 FAILED at 1277.
18 out of 19 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file config.guess.rej
(...)
patching file config.sub
Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
Hunk #2 FAILED at 70.
Hunk #3 FAILED at 145.
Hunk #4 FAILED at 237.
Hunk #5 FAILED at 264.
Hunk #6 FAILED at 300.
Hunk #7 FAILED at 310.
Hunk #8 FAILED at 326.
Hunk #9 FAILED at 343.
Hunk #10 FAILED at 446.
Hunk #11 succeeded at 490 with fuzz 2 (offset 33 lines).
Hunk #12 succeeded at 526 with fuzz 2 (offset 37 lines).
Hunk #13 FAILED at 708.
Hunk #14 FAILED at 788.
Hunk #15 FAILED at 834.
Hunk #16 succeeded at 932 with fuzz 2 (offset 59 lines).
Hunk #17 succeeded at 949 with fuzz 2 (offset 65 lines).
Hunk #18 FAILED at 1026.
Hunk #19 succeeded at 1098 with fuzz 2 (offset 65 lines).
Hunk #20 succeeded at 1135 with fuzz 2 (offset 68 lines).
Hunk #21 succeeded at 1273 with fuzz 2 (offset 71 lines).
Hunk #22 succeeded at 1379 with fuzz 2 (offset 74 lines).
Hunk #23 succeeded at 1422 with fuzz 2 (offset 83 lines).
Hunk #24 succeeded at 1480 with fuzz 2 (offset 92 lines).
14 out of 24 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file config.sub.rej
(...)
Just in case you want to see exactly what is wrong, you can build the
package (dpkg-buildpackage, for example) and then try to revert the
patch (cat debian/patches/01_i18n | patch -R -p1).
It will save the .rej files (you can see that the changes aren't big).
The responsible for the patch (as noted inside debian/patches/01_i18n)
can be contacted via webmaster@teki.jpn.ph
Homepage of the patch is http://teki.jpn.ph/pc/software/index-e.shtml
But I don't think that there is something wrong with his patch.
I am CCing Patrick, who did the QA work of the last upload of dillo.
It's also a problem for the Debian package, since it needs to build
twice without failing. Not a big problem, but a problem :-)
[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2007/12/msg00188.html
[2] https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dillo/+bug/178046
Best regards,
Nelson
----- End forwarded message -----
Reply to: