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

skkdic fix



On Sun, May 08, 2005 at 11:15:21AM +0900, shock@csc.jp wrote:
> Package: skkdic
> Version: 20040323-1
> Severity: serious
> 
> The following syntax in which there is debian/rules is dependent on bash.
> >	rm debian/skkdic-extra/usr/share/skk/SKK-JISYO.{L,wrong.annotated,china_taiwan.header}
> >	cp zipcode/{README.ja,words.zipcode} debian/skkdic-extra/usr/share/doc/skkdic-extra/zipcode
> 
> In the following, syntax error is reported by dash.
> >	/bin/sh debian/make-skkdic-cdb SKK-JISYO.L \
> >	debian/skkdic-cdb/usr/share/skk/SKK-JISYO.L.cdb

I just NMU'd to fix this bug, to save this package, which is in woody
too, for sarge.

NMU diff:

diff -u skkdic-20040323/debian/changelog skkdic-20040323/debian/changelog
--- skkdic-20040323/debian/changelog
+++ skkdic-20040323/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,10 @@
+skkdic (20040323-1.1) unstable; urgency=high
+
+  * Non-Maintainer Upload
+  * Have debian/rules use bash as shell, to allow for bashisms (Closes: #308125)
+
+ -- Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl>  Fri, 13 May 2005 01:32:10 +0200
+
 skkdic (20040323-1) unstable; urgency=low
 
   * New upstream release (Closes: Bug#238240)
diff -u skkdic-20040323/debian/rules skkdic-20040323/debian/rules
--- skkdic-20040323/debian/rules
+++ skkdic-20040323/debian/rules
@@ -15,6 +15,9 @@
 # This has to be exported to make some magic below work.
 export DH_OPTIONS
 
+# Allow us to use bash-specific features
+export SHELL=/bin/bash
+
 configure: configure-stamp
 configure-stamp:
 	dh_testdir
@@ -53,7 +56,7 @@
 	cp SKK-JISYO.wrong.annotated debian/skkdic-extra/usr/share/doc/skkdic-extra
 	cp zipcode/{README.ja,words.zipcode} debian/skkdic-extra/usr/share/doc/skkdic-extra/zipcode
 
-	/bin/sh debian/make-skkdic-cdb SKK-JISYO.L \
+	/bin/bash debian/make-skkdic-cdb SKK-JISYO.L \
 	debian/skkdic-cdb/usr/share/skk/SKK-JISYO.L.cdb
 
 #	dh_movefiles


Regards,
--Jeroen

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
jeroen@wolffelaar.nl
http://jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl



Reply to: