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

Re: when postgrey 1.21-2 in volatile?



This one time, at band camp, Adrian von Bidder said:
> On Tuesday 28 February 2006 22:23, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> > > > with regard to
> > > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=298832
> 
> > i spoke with Martin Krafft (madduck) recently (at FOSDEM) and indicated,
> > that i am willing to accept this fix, when the next round of whitelist
> > updates hits volatile; even though this is not a bug which normaly
> > should be fixed via volatile.
> 
> Yo all!
> 
> madduck - if you want you can do an upload (personally, I don't see any 
> urgency here, I'll do the next upload when 1.25 is out with any whitelist 
> changes).  I won't find time today and I'm offline until 20.3.  But I'd 
> recommend to isolate the fix for this bug and not the whole 1.21-2 changes.  
> Which should be (Arrgh, there's no separate commit for it.  Note to self: 
> use svn properly to isolate fixes...):
>
>
>
> +if [[ "$POSTGREY_TEXT" = "" ]]; then

Just being nitpicky, but why the double brackets?  Isn't this more
POSIXly correctly expressed as 
if [ -z "$POSTGREY_TEXT" ]; then
?

Of course, you're probably already off line, but ....

Thanks,
-- 
 -----------------------------------------------------------------
|   ,''`.                                            Stephen Gran |
|  : :' :                                        sgran@debian.org |
|  `. `'                        Debian user, admin, and developer |
|    `-                                     http://www.debian.org |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: