Due to moves etc I've not looked at this in great detail. I see James's point - it's easily missed if you don't spot the mailer. That being said I like it so far. It seems pretty readable and clean. On 25 February 2015 at 14:02, Steffen Nurpmeso <sdaoden@yandex.com> wrote:
James Mills <prologic@shortcircuit.net.au> wrote: |On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso <sdaoden@yandex.com> |wrote:
|> The first version missed HAVE_GETDTABLESIZE and HAVE_IOPRIO_SET so |> it was not enough indeed. |> Find attached a compressed git(1) format-patch, the nm(1) output |> of the compiled result is "identical" to that of the version i got |> from following the dpkg recipe of yours. |> And i have registered at the Debian Package Tracker and subscribed |> to dpkg updates, which makes me hope i get notifications on |> release updates? Is that enough? | |This should probably go in out repo(s) somewhere |perhaps our "tools" repo? Mabe fork/branch from dpkg |and rebase on new changes (without the rest of dpkg)?
It doesn't seem to be a wild guess to say that further maintenance shouldn't be a real burden... (The 1.17.24 version is identical to what was in 1.17.23, for example.) I'm fine with whatever you wanna do, but willing to help with this as necessary.
--steffen _______________________________________________ CRUX mailing list CRUX@lists.crux.nu https://lists.crux.nu/mailman/listinfo/crux
-- Photography at PBase.. www.pbase.com/sulman