Mailing list for MinGW developers. A closed list, but useful to browse through to see the current MinGW developer activities.

dos2unix

Hi,

If there is interest I'm willing to package and maintain "dos2unix" for 
MinGW and MSYS. The version that I maintain is used in major Linux 
distributions and since Apr 2011 also standard on Cygwin. See 
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/dos2unix.html

On Cygwin it replaced the Cygutils' version of dos2unix. Msys/MinGW also 
has the Cygutils version.

If you don't want it, that's also fine with me.

best regards,

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 10 Feb 22:00

Re: dos2unix

Erwin Waterlander schreef, Op 9-2-2012 0:09:
> Hi,
>
> If there is interest I'm willing to package and maintain "dos2unix" for
> MinGW and MSYS. The version that I maintain is used in major Linux
> distributions and since Apr 2011 also standard on Cygwin. See
> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/dos2unix.html
>
> On Cygwin it replaced the Cygutils' version of dos2unix. Msys/MinGW also
> has the Cygutils version.
>
> If you don't want it, that's also fine with me.
>
> best regards,
>

Hi,

I prepared mingw32-dos2unix packages. I put them for review at
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/

regards,

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 10 Feb 22:46

Re: dos2unix

Erwin Waterlander schreef, Op 10-2-2012 22:00:
> Erwin Waterlander schreef, Op 9-2-2012 0:09:
>> Hi,
>>
>> If there is interest I'm willing to package and maintain "dos2unix" for
>> MinGW and MSYS. The version that I maintain is used in major Linux
>> distributions and since Apr 2011 also standard on Cygwin. See
>> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/dos2unix.html
>>
>> On Cygwin it replaced the Cygutils' version of dos2unix. Msys/MinGW also
>> has the Cygutils version.
>>
>> If you don't want it, that's also fine with me.
>>
>> best regards,
>>
> Hi,
>
> I prepared mingw32-dos2unix packages. I put them for review at
> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/
>
> regards,
>

I also added msys-dos2unix packages.

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 11 Feb 11:51

Re: dos2unix

On 2/8/2012 6:09 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> If there is interest I'm willing to package and maintain "dos2unix" for
> MinGW and MSYS. The version that I maintain is used in major Linux
> distributions and since Apr 2011 also standard on Cygwin. See
> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/dos2unix.html
>
> On Cygwin it replaced the Cygutils' version of dos2unix. Msys/MinGW also
> has the Cygutils version.

I'm in favor of this, but we will need to coordinate an update of the 
existing cygutils packages:

	msys-cygutils-dos2unix

needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new

	msys-dos2unix

package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml.   I'm not sure 
how this should be handled.  Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.

Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename".  How do we 
handle that?

--
Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing

(Continue reading)

headers

waterlan | 20 Feb 15:03

Re: dos2unix

On 2012-02-11 11:51, Charles Wilson wrote:

> On 2/8/2012 6:09 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>
>> If there is interest I'm willing to package and maintain "dos2unix" 
>> for
>> MinGW and MSYS. The version that I maintain is used in major Linux
>> distributions and since Apr 2011 also standard on Cygwin. See
>> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/dos2unix.html [1] On Cygwin it 
>> replaced
>> the Cygutils' version of dos2unix. Msys/MinGW also has the Cygutils
>> version.
>
> I'm in favor of this, but we will need to coordinate an update of the
> existing cygutils packages:
>
> msys-cygutils-dos2unix
>
> needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new
>
> msys-dos2unix
>
> package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml. I'm not sure
> how this should be handled. Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.
>
> Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename". How do we
> handle that?
>
> --
> Chuck

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 21 Feb 00:01

Re: dos2unix

Erwin, Chuck,

Apologies for the delayed response.

On 11/02/12 10:51, Charles Wilson wrote:
> we will need to coordinate an update of the existing cygutils
> packages:
> 
> 	msys-cygutils-dos2unix
> 
> needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new
> 
> 	msys-dos2unix
> 
> package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml.   I'm not sure 
> how this should be handled.  Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.
> 
> Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename".  How do we 
> handle that?

There is no formal mechanism, in mingw-get, to support renaming
packages; nor do I have any plans for adding such support.  As is the
case with CVS, you may rename the package, effectively deleting the old
and creating the new, but then there will be no logical relationship
between the two.

Neither is there, at present, any capability for specifying conflicts
between packages, such that if foo is installed, it must be removed on
subsequently installing bar.  This is a feature I may add eventually,
but I don't consider it as an immediate priority.

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 22 Feb 19:59

Re: dos2unix

Keith Marshall schreef, Op 21-2-2012 0:01:
> Erwin, Chuck,
>
> Apologies for the delayed response.
>
> On 11/02/12 10:51, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> we will need to coordinate an update of the existing cygutils
>> packages:
>>
>> 	msys-cygutils-dos2unix
>>
>> needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new
>>
>> 	msys-dos2unix
>>
>> package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml.   I'm not sure
>> how this should be handled.  Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.
>>
>> Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename".  How do we
>> handle that?
> There is no formal mechanism, in mingw-get, to support renaming
> packages; nor do I have any plans for adding such support.  As is the
> case with CVS, you may rename the package, effectively deleting the old
> and creating the new, but then there will be no logical relationship
> between the two.
>
> Neither is there, at present, any capability for specifying conflicts
> between packages, such that if foo is installed, it must be removed on
> subsequently installing bar.  This is a feature I may add eventually,
> but I don't consider it as an immediate priority.

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 22 Feb 23:29

Re: dos2unix

On 22/02/12 18:59, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> The current mingw-cygutils-dos2unix package ...

The current package is called "mingw32-cygutil-dos2unix"; I assume your
"mingw-..." is an accidental omission, but just in case, you need to

  s/mingw/mingw32/g

in all instances please.

> ... has one alias "mingw-dos2unix".

That's not what I see:

  <package name="mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix" alias="cygutils-dos2unix">

> The name of the new package is "mingw-dos2unix".

That needs to be "mingw32-dos2unix", so you may rewrite the header as:

  <package name="mingw32-dos2unix"
    alias="dos2unix cygutils-dos2unix mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix">

(You are allowed only one "alias" attribute, but it may specify multiple
aliases, separated by spaces).

> It has no relation with cygutils.

It has, in the sense that it (presumably) provides replacements for the
cygutils payload, e.g. dos2unix.exe, unix2dos.exe ...

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 23 Feb 01:07

Re: dos2unix

On 2/22/2012 5:29 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:

> Keeping it as an "extension" package seems best to me.

Agreed.

--
Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 23 Feb 18:04

Re: dos2unix

Op 22-2-2012 23:29, Keith Marshall schreef:
> On 22/02/12 18:59, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> The current mingw-cygutils-dos2unix package ...
> The current package is called "mingw32-cygutil-dos2unix"; I assume your
> "mingw-..." is an accidental omission, but just in case, you need to
>
>    s/mingw/mingw32/g
>
> in all instances please.

I meant "mingw32".

>
>> ... has one alias "mingw-dos2unix".
> That's not what I see:
>
>    <package name="mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix" alias="cygutils-dos2unix">

You are right. Actually I was looking at the msys version of the 
cygutils xml file when I wrote that:
<package name="msys-cygutils-dos2unix" alias="msys-dos2unix">

>> The name of the new package is "mingw-dos2unix".
> That needs to be "mingw32-dos2unix", so you may rewrite the header as:
>
>    <package name="mingw32-dos2unix"
>      alias="dos2unix cygutils-dos2unix mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix">
>
> (You are allowed only one "alias" attribute, but it may specify multiple
> aliases, separated by spaces).

(Continue reading)

headers

Earnie Boyd | 23 Feb 18:23

Re: dos2unix

On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>
> Because there is an msys version and a mingw32 version, I was thinking
> to omit the "dos2unix" alias. A user will have to select either
> msys-dos2unix or mingw32-dos2unix.
>

If there are both our practice is to default to mingw32 so please do
not omit the dos2unix alias.

--

-- 
Earnie
-- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 23 Feb 18:54

Re: dos2unix

Earnie Boyd schreef, Op 23-2-2012 18:23:
> If there are both our practice is to default to mingw32 so please do 
> not omit the dos2unix alias. 

OK. I added the dos2unix alias. I think the xml files are now ready for 
upload. See
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing 
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 24 Feb 10:23

Re: dos2unix

Op 21-2-2012 0:01, Keith Marshall schreef:
> Erwin, Chuck,
>
> Apologies for the delayed response.
>
> On 11/02/12 10:51, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> we will need to coordinate an update of the existing cygutils
>> packages:
>>
>> 	msys-cygutils-dos2unix
>>
>> needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new
>>
>> 	msys-dos2unix
>>
>> package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml.   I'm not sure
>> how this should be handled.  Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.
>>
>> Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename".  How do we
>> handle that?
> There is no formal mechanism, in mingw-get, to support renaming
> packages; nor do I have any plans for adding such support.  As is the
> case with CVS, you may rename the package, effectively deleting the old
> and creating the new, but then there will be no logical relationship
> between the two.
>
> Neither is there, at present, any capability for specifying conflicts
> between packages, such that if foo is installed, it must be removed on
> subsequently installing bar.  This is a feature I may add eventually,
> but I don't consider it as an immediate priority.

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 28 Feb 20:57

Re: dos2unix

Erwin Waterlander schreef, Op 24-2-2012 10:23:
> Op 21-2-2012 0:01, Keith Marshall schreef:
>> Erwin, Chuck,
>>
>> Apologies for the delayed response.
>>
>> On 11/02/12 10:51, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>> we will need to coordinate an update of the existing cygutils
>>> packages:
>>>
>>> 	msys-cygutils-dos2unix
>>>
>>> needs to be removed? obsoleted? in favor of the new
>>>
>>> 	msys-dos2unix
>>>
>>> package, with appropriate changes made to msys-base.xml.   I'm not sure
>>> how this should be handled.  Ditto for mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix.
>>>
>>> Keith -- effectively, this would be a "package rename".  How do we
>>> handle that?
>> There is no formal mechanism, in mingw-get, to support renaming
>> packages; nor do I have any plans for adding such support.  As is the
>> case with CVS, you may rename the package, effectively deleting the old
>> and creating the new, but then there will be no logical relationship
>> between the two.
>>
>> Neither is there, at present, any capability for specifying conflicts
>> between packages, such that if foo is installed, it must be removed on
>> subsequently installing bar.  This is a feature I may add eventually,

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 1 Mar 23:34

Re: dos2unix

On 28/02/12 19:57, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> As I understand it, the following should now be done:
>>
>> 1) Charles should remove the dos2unix package sections from the
>>    cygutils xml files

And the history for those components needs to be encapsulated in your
replacement files.

>> 2) The new dos2unix xml files have to be uploaded
>> 3) The package lists should be updated with an addition of the
>>    new dos2unix packages.
>>
>> Is this correct?

Since these will be officially supported packages, your changes must
be properly integrated into mingw-dist; there is a little bit more to
this than simply uploading a new xml file or two.

> If I don't hear anything this week I assume it is OK. I change the 
> xml files next week.

Please hold off on this...

At a cursory glance, I note that you haven't set the issue number
appropriately, in the <software-distribution .../> elements of your
xml files.  Aside from this, and the missing history from the cygutils
components you are superseding, they look superficially okay; however,
we do need to thoroughly test the intended interactions, before we
consider uploading any new xml files; my own preliminary testing

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 2 Mar 11:37

Re: dos2unix

Op 1-3-2012 23:34, Keith Marshall schreef:
> On 28/02/12 19:57, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>>> As I understand it, the following should now be done:
>>>
>>> 1) Charles should remove the dos2unix package sections from the
>>>     cygutils xml files
> And the history for those components needs to be encapsulated in your
> replacement files.

I don't understand what that means. I have added the cygutils aliases. 
What else do I need to do?
Perhaps a paragraph in the release notes that says, that the package 
replaces cygutils-dos2unix?

>
>>> 2) The new dos2unix xml files have to be uploaded
>>> 3) The package lists should be updated with an addition of the
>>>     new dos2unix packages.
>>>
>>> Is this correct?
> Since these will be officially supported packages, your changes must
> be properly integrated into mingw-dist; there is a little bit more to
> this than simply uploading a new xml file or two.
>
>> If I don't hear anything this week I assume it is OK. I change the
>> xml files next week.
> Please hold off on this...
>
> At a cursory glance, I note that you haven't set the issue number
> appropriately, in the<software-distribution .../>  elements of your

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 3 Mar 12:37

Re: dos2unix

On 02/03/12 10:37, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>>> 1) Charles should remove the dos2unix package sections from the
>>>     cygutils xml files
>> 
>> And the history for those components needs to be encapsulated in your
>> replacement files.
> 
> I don't understand what that means. I have added the cygutils aliases. 
> What else do I need to do?

You want to provide an upgrade path, such that mingw-get will view any
prior installation of cygutils-dos2unix as upgradeable to your dos2unix
replacement.  It can't make this association automatically, because the
tarname of your new package doesn't match the tarname of the old, as it
is recorded in the sysroot-*.xml files, so you need to tell it.  You do
this by including release references for the old package, within the
component specification for the new, e.g.:--

  <component class="bin">
    <release tarname="dos2unix-5.3.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
      <requires eq="mingw32-libiconv-*-mingw32-*-dll-2.tar" />
      <requires eq="mingw32-libintl-*-mingw32-*-dll-8.tar" />
    </release>
    <release tarname="cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
      <licence tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-lic.tar.%" />
      <source tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-src.tar.%" />
      <requires eq="mingw32-libpopt-*-mingw32-*-dll-0.tar" />
    </release>
  </component>

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 4 Mar 21:37

Re: dos2unix

Keith Marshall schreef, Op 3-3-2012 12:37:Keith Marshall schreef, Op 
3-3-2012 12:37:
> You want to provide an upgrade path, such that mingw-get will view any
> prior installation of cygutils-dos2unix as upgradeable to your dos2unix
> replacement.  It can't make this association automatically, because the
> tarname of your new package doesn't match the tarname of the old, as it
> is recorded in the sysroot-*.xml files, so you need to tell it.  You do
> this by including release references for the old package, within the
> component specification for the new, e.g.:--
>
>    <component class="bin">
>      <release tarname="dos2unix-5.3.2-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
>        <requires eq="mingw32-libiconv-*-mingw32-*-dll-2.tar" />
>        <requires eq="mingw32-libintl-*-mingw32-*-dll-8.tar" />
>      </release>
>      <release tarname="cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
>        <licence tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-lic.tar.%" />
>        <source tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-src.tar.%" />
>        <requires eq="mingw32-libpopt-*-mingw32-*-dll-0.tar" />
>      </release>
>    </component>
>
>

Hi Keith,

Thanks. I added that to the xml files. Do I need to do this only for 
component class "bin"?
What are the next steps?

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 13 Mar 17:49

Re: dos2unix

On 2012-03-04 21:37, Erwin Waterlander wrote:

> Keith Marshall schreef, Op 3-3-2012 12:37:Keith Marshall schreef, Op
> 3-3-2012 12:37:
>
>> You want to provide an upgrade path, such that mingw-get will view 
>> any
>> prior installation of cygutils-dos2unix as upgradeable to your 
>> dos2unix
>> replacement. It can't make this association automatically, because 
>> the
>> tarname of your new package doesn't match the tarname of the old, as 
>> it
>> is recorded in the sysroot-*.xml files, so you need to tell it. You 
>> do
>> this by including release references for the old package, within the
>> component specification for the new, e.g.:--
>
> Hi Keith,
>
> Thanks. I added that to the xml files. Do I need to do this only for
> component class "bin"?
> What are the next steps?
>
>

Hi Keith,

Are the xml files correct now?
Do the cygutils xml files need to be edited?

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 30 Mar 14:59

Re: dos2unix

Hi Erwin,

Sorry for the delayed response; I've been busy with other issues.

On 13/03/12 16:49, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> Thanks. I added that to the xml files.

Okay, thanks.

>> Do I need to do this only for component class "bin"?

If you want your own documentation and/or licence files to supplant the
corresponding files from cygutils, then you also need to update their
component specifications accordingly.  It seems to me, particularly in
the case of the mingw32-cygutils package, that you could/should adopt
everything, and allow that original package to disappear, but I'd like
to have Chuck's opinion before just jumping in.

>> What are the next steps?

Replace the issue attributes in your current files with a generic issue
template, of the form @YYYYMMDDNN@, and integrate them into mingw-dist.
I guess it would make sense for me to grant you CVS access, if you are
happy to manage that yourself?

> Are the xml files correct now?

They look very close to it, AFAICS.  I'd rather hoped that Chuck might
have chimed in though, since you are supplanting his packages.

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 30 Mar 23:50

Re: dos2unix

On 3/30/2012 8:59 AM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> Hi Erwin,
> 
> Sorry for the delayed response; I've been busy with other issues.
> 
> On 13/03/12 16:49, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>>> Thanks. I added that to the xml files.
> 
> Okay, thanks.
> 
>>> Do I need to do this only for component class "bin"?
> 
> If you want your own documentation and/or licence files to supplant the
> corresponding files from cygutils, then you also need to update their
> component specifications accordingly.  It seems to me, particularly in
> the case of the mingw32-cygutils package, that you could/should adopt
> everything, and allow that original package to disappear, but I'd like
> to have Chuck's opinion before just jumping in.

Yes, this is the right thing to do.

>>> What are the next steps?
> 
> Replace the issue attributes in your current files with a generic issue
> template, of the form @YYYYMMDDNN@, and integrate them into mingw-dist.
> I guess it would make sense for me to grant you CVS access, if you are
> happy to manage that yourself?
> 
>> Are the xml files correct now?
>

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 2 Apr 03:23

Re: dos2unix

On 3/30/2012 8:59 AM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> If you want your own documentation and/or licence files to supplant the
> corresponding files from cygutils, then you also need to update their
> component specifications accordingly.  It seems to me, particularly in
> the case of the mingw32-cygutils package, that you could/should adopt
> everything, and allow that original package to disappear, but I'd like
> to have Chuck's opinion before just jumping in.

I think the existing *-cygutils.xml files should be updated as in the 
attached patch, which removes all mention of *-cygutils-dos2unix ... 
thus letting the new *-dos2unix.xml files "take over".

Also, as msys-cygutils-dos2unix WAS part of
	<affiliate group="MSYS Base System" />
I believe that the new msys-dos2unix should ALSO be a part of that. 
Similarly, msys-base.xml should be updated as attached (although the 
alias in the new msys-dos2unix package means that msys-base doesn't NEED 
to be changed, it's better to be explicit and not rely on the alias).

>>> What are the next steps?
>
> Replace the issue attributes in your current files with a generic issue
> template, of the form @YYYYMMDDNN@, and integrate them into mingw-dist.
> I guess it would make sense for me to grant you CVS access, if you are
> happy to manage that yourself?
>
>> Are the xml files correct now?
>
> They look very close to it, AFAICS.  I'd rather hoped that Chuck might
> have chimed in though, since you are supplanting his packages.

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 3 Apr 21:09

Re: dos2unix

Charles Wilson schreef, Op 2-4-2012 3:23:
> On 3/30/2012 8:59 AM, Keith Marshall wrote:
>> If you want your own documentation and/or licence files to supplant the
>> corresponding files from cygutils, then you also need to update their
>> component specifications accordingly.  It seems to me, particularly in
>> the case of the mingw32-cygutils package, that you could/should adopt
>> everything, and allow that original package to disappear, but I'd like
>> to have Chuck's opinion before just jumping in.
>
> I think the existing *-cygutils.xml files should be updated as in the 
> attached patch, which removes all mention of *-cygutils-dos2unix ... 
> thus letting the new *-dos2unix.xml files "take over".
>
> Also, as msys-cygutils-dos2unix WAS part of
> <affiliate group="MSYS Base System" />

I have added this to msys-dos2unix.xml

> I believe that the new msys-dos2unix should ALSO be a part of that. 
> Similarly, msys-base.xml should be updated as attached (although the 
> alias in the new msys-dos2unix package means that msys-base doesn't 
> NEED to be changed, it's better to be explicit and not rely on the 
> alias).
>
>>>> What are the next steps?
>>
>> Replace the issue attributes in your current files with a generic issue
>> template, of the form @YYYYMMDDNN@, and integrate them into mingw-dist.
>> I guess it would make sense for me to grant you CVS access, if you are
>> happy to manage that yourself?

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 3 Apr 22:15

Re: dos2unix

Charles Wilson schreef, Op 2-4-2012 3:23:
>
>> Sure.  Confirm that you can 'mingw-get upgrade ...' from an existing
>> cygutils installation, with proper substitution of your own components,
>> and that 'mingw-get show mingw32-dos2unix-bin' (for example), reflects
>> the correct package status, (particularly the 'Installed Version' and
>> 'Repository Version' notifications), when you run it both before and
>> after the 'mingw-get upgrade ...', and post your results here.
>
>
> ...Erwin could verify this first.

Hi,

I did the following: I moved my original c:\mingw folder away and 
created a new one. I installed mingw-get under c:/mingw and changed 
PATH=c:\mingw\bin;%PATH%
I ran "mingw-get install mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix". This installed the 
requested package and the required packages. Xml files have been 
downloaded under var/lib/mingw-get/data/.

I applied Charles' two patches, and I added my new mingw32-dos2unix.xml 
and msys-dos2unix.xml to the data directory. When I try to install 
mingw32-dos2unix I get the message that the package is unknown. What did 
I forget?

c:\mingw>find . -name mingw32-dos2unix.xml
.\var\lib\mingw-get\data\mingw32-dos2unix.xml

c:\mingw>set MINGW_GET_ROOT=c:/mingw

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 3 Apr 22:31

Re: dos2unix

Erwin Waterlander schreef, Op 3-4-2012 22:15:
> Charles Wilson schreef, Op 2-4-2012 3:23:
>>> Sure.  Confirm that you can 'mingw-get upgrade ...' from an existing
>>> cygutils installation, with proper substitution of your own components,
>>> and that 'mingw-get show mingw32-dos2unix-bin' (for example), reflects
>>> the correct package status, (particularly the 'Installed Version' and
>>> 'Repository Version' notifications), when you run it both before and
>>> after the 'mingw-get upgrade ...', and post your results here.
>>
>> ...Erwin could verify this first.
> Hi,
>
> I did the following: I moved my original c:\mingw folder away and
> created a new one. I installed mingw-get under c:/mingw and changed
> PATH=c:\mingw\bin;%PATH%
> I ran "mingw-get install mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix". This installed the
> requested package and the required packages. Xml files have been
> downloaded under var/lib/mingw-get/data/.
>
> I applied Charles' two patches, and I added my new mingw32-dos2unix.xml
> and msys-dos2unix.xml to the data directory. When I try to install
> mingw32-dos2unix I get the message that the package is unknown. What did
> I forget?
>

I forget to add msys-dos2unix and mingw32-dos2unix to the package lists. 
After adding them installation was successful:

c:\mingw>mingw-get install mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix
mingw-get: *** WARNING *** c:\mingw\var/lib/mingw-get/data/profile.xml:

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 3 Apr 22:34

Re: dos2unix

On 03/04/12 21:15, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> I applied Charles' two patches, and I added my new mingw32-dos2unix.xml 
> and msys-dos2unix.xml to the data directory. When I try to install 
> mingw32-dos2unix I get the message that the package is unknown. What did 
> I forget?

I guess you're missing a reference in mingw32-package-list.xml, to tell
mingw-get to read your new file.  Ditto for msys-package-list.xml

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second 
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 3 Apr 20:54

Re: dos2unix

Keith Marshall schreef, Op 30-3-2012 14:59:
> Hi Erwin,
>
> Sorry for the delayed response; I've been busy with other issues.

No problem. In the meantime I released a new dos2unix version 5.3.3.

>>> Do I need to do this only for component class "bin"?
> If you want your own documentation and/or licence files to supplant the
> corresponding files from cygutils, then you also need to update their
> component specifications accordingly.  It seems to me, particularly in
> the case of the mingw32-cygutils package, that you could/should adopt

The idea is to only replace the mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package and 
keep the ming32-cygutils package, and likewise for the msys variant. The 
mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package has no 'doc' and 'lic' component. The 
source and license files are already specified in my xml files. So I 
think I can keep the xml files as they are.

> everything, and allow that original package to disappear, but I'd like
> to have Chuck's opinion before just jumping in.
Me too.

>> How can it be tested without messing up the official xml catalogue?
> For local testing, you can simply modify the (uncompressed) copies in
> your local $MINGW_GET_ROOT/var/lib/mingw-get/data directory, and run
> various mingw-get commands, to confirm correct behaviour.  If you'd like
> an example of how to set up a mingw-get sandbox, take a look at
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=102435&aid=3424406&group_id=2435

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 3 Apr 22:25

Re: dos2unix

On 03/04/12 19:54, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> The idea is to only replace the mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package and 
> keep the ming32-cygutils package, and likewise for the msys variant. The 
> mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package has no 'doc' and 'lic' component.

The 'doc' and 'lic' components are furnished by mingw32-cygutils.
AFAICS, beyond providing this documentation, together with additional
documentation for other utilities which are not provided, once the
mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix is deprecated, mingw32-cygutils ceases to
provide anything useful; both need to die together.

> The source and license files are already specified in my xml files.
> So I think I can keep the xml files as they are.

See above.  Your dos2unix package provides its own documentation and
licence components.  These deprecate the corresponding mingw32-cygutils
equivalents; your XML needs to reflect this.

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second 
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 3 Apr 22:56

Re: dos2unix

Keith Marshall schreef, Op 3-4-2012 22:25:
> On 03/04/12 19:54, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> The idea is to only replace the mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package and
>> keep the ming32-cygutils package, and likewise for the msys variant. The
>> mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix package has no 'doc' and 'lic' component.
> The 'doc' and 'lic' components are furnished by mingw32-cygutils.
> AFAICS, beyond providing this documentation, together with additional
> documentation for other utilities which are not provided, once the
> mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix is deprecated, mingw32-cygutils ceases to
> provide anything useful; both need to die together.

You are right.

>
>> The source and license files are already specified in my xml files.
>> So I think I can keep the xml files as they are.
> See above.  Your dos2unix package provides its own documentation and
> licence components.  These deprecate the corresponding mingw32-cygutils
> equivalents; your XML needs to reflect this.
>

OK. I updated the mingw32-dos2unix.xml file. After adding the 
mingw32-cygutils old doc and lic packages, you can see that the doc and 
lic packages get updated:

c:\mingw>mingw-get install mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix
mingw-get: *** WARNING *** c:\mingw\var/lib/mingw-get/data/profile.xml: 
user configuration file missing
mingw-get: *** INFO *** c:\mingw\var/lib/mingw-get/data/defaults.xml: 
trying system default configuration

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 4 Apr 06:33

Re: dos2unix

On 4/3/2012 4:25 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> The 'doc' and 'lic' components are furnished by mingw32-cygutils.
> AFAICS, beyond providing this documentation, together with additional
> documentation for other utilities which are not provided, once the
> mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix is deprecated, mingw32-cygutils ceases to
> provide anything useful; both need to die together.

Good point. The mingw32 variant of cygutils was there ONLY as the 
overarching provider of the mingw32(cygutils)dos2unix tools.  If you 
remove them (e.g. supplant them with Erwin's tools), then all you're 
left with is a couple of documentation tarballs.

So it appears that mingw32-cygutils.xml should be deleted, and removed 
from mingw32-package-list.xml.

However, if we want to allow "rollback" capability to the cygutils 
version of dos2unix, then this "bin" needs to stay:

       <component class="bin">
         ...
         <release tarname="cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
           <licence tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-lic.tar.%" />
           <source tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-src.tar.%" />
           <requires eq="mingw32-libpopt-*-mingw32-*-dll-0.tar" />
         </release>
       </component>

For rollback on the "doc" and "lic" packages, you'd also need:

       <component class="doc">

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 4 Apr 19:03

Re: dos2unix

Charles Wilson schreef, Op 4-4-2012 6:33:
> On 4/3/2012 4:25 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
>> The 'doc' and 'lic' components are furnished by mingw32-cygutils.
>> AFAICS, beyond providing this documentation, together with additional
>> documentation for other utilities which are not provided, once the
>> mingw32-cygutils-dos2unix is deprecated, mingw32-cygutils ceases to
>> provide anything useful; both need to die together.
> Good point. The mingw32 variant of cygutils was there ONLY as the
> overarching provider of the mingw32(cygutils)dos2unix tools.  If you
> remove them (e.g. supplant them with Erwin's tools), then all you're
> left with is a couple of documentation tarballs.
>
> So it appears that mingw32-cygutils.xml should be deleted, and removed
> from mingw32-package-list.xml.
>
> However, if we want to allow "rollback" capability to the cygutils
> version of dos2unix, then this "bin" needs to stay:
>
>         <component class="bin">
>           ...
>           <release tarname="cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma">
>             <licence tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-lic.tar.%" />
>             <source tarname="cygutils-%-mingw32-%-src.tar.%" />
>             <requires eq="mingw32-libpopt-*-mingw32-*-dll-0.tar" />
>           </release>
>         </component>
>
> For rollback on the "doc" and "lic" packages, you'd also need:
>
>         <component class="doc">

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 4 Apr 20:51

Re: dos2unix

On 04/04/12 18:03, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> I made the changes that Charles proposed. A new xml file is at 
> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/
> 
> I want to test it, but I don't know how to 'rollback' to an older 
> version with mingw-get.

With the current publicly released version, you can't.

I have a sandbox version which can do it -- see my other recent thread
on the subject of forcing a specific package version.  I'll try to post
a snapshot of that (on my personal SF pages) tomorrow or Friday.

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second 
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev

headers

Keith Marshall | 8 Apr 02:24

Re: dos2unix

On 04/04/12 19:51, Keith Marshall wrote:
> I have a sandbox version which can do it -- see my other recent thread
> on the subject of forcing a specific package version.  I'll try to post
> a snapshot of that (on my personal SF pages) tomorrow or Friday.

Didn't have it ready for Friday, but it's there now:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/keithmarshall.u/files/

To perform a roll back, use 'mingw-get upgrade ...', e.g.:

  $ mingw-get upgrade "dos2unix-bin<5.0"

would roll back to the last release pre-dating v5.0, which should be the
old cygutils version.  You can use '>', '>=', '=', '<=', or '<' as the
version selector, or even a range such as '>=2.0<=5.0', (which, in this
case wouldn't match any existing version).

This snapshot also includes the Lua-5.2 scripting engine; I've posted an
updated copy of mingw32-mingw-get.xml[*], to illustrate how that may be
used, in conjunction with the new '--desktop' and '--start-menu'
options, to create windows shell links (aka shortcuts).

[*] If you looked at my original illustration of this concept, please
note that this is an improved version, making use of additional Lua
modules I've provided in libexec/mingw-get.

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 9 Apr 17:06

Re: dos2unix

Keith Marshall schreef, Op 8-4-2012 2:24:
> Didn't have it ready for Friday, but it's there now:
> https://sourceforge.net/projects/keithmarshall.u/files/
>
> To perform a roll back, use 'mingw-get upgrade ...', e.g.:
>
>    $ mingw-get upgrade "dos2unix-bin<5.0"
>
> would roll back to the last release pre-dating v5.0, which should be the
> old cygutils version.  You can use '>','>=', '=', '<=', or '<' as the
> version selector, or even a range such as '>=2.0<=5.0', (which, in this
> case wouldn't match any existing version).
>

Hi,

Thanks Keith. It works (see below). So I think we can say now that the 
xml files are correct. Charles, you said you wanted to do the initial 
installation and changes of the xml files...

best regards,
Erwin

C:\mingw>mingw-get upgrade "dos2unix-bin<5.0"
mingw-get: *** WARNING *** c:\mingw\var/lib/mingw-get/data/profile.xml: 
user configuration file missing
mingw-get: *** INFO *** c:\mingw\var/lib/mingw-get/data/defaults.xml: 
trying system default configuration
upgrade: cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma
  removing release dos2unix-5.3.3-1-mingw32-bin.tar.lzma

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 9 Apr 17:19

Re: dos2unix

On 4/9/2012 11:06 AM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> Thanks Keith. It works (see below). So I think we can say now that the 
> xml files are correct. Charles, you said you wanted to do the initial 
> installation and changes of the xml files...

Yes, I will -- but *supposedly* I'm waiting on Earnie to bump my "role"
from "release technician" to "shell access" since that's what SF support
says we need to do, in order to upload stuff now.

Never mind that I already HAVE shell access, and still can't upload stuff.

Now, maybe this is just a terminology thing. And a "shell access role"
has nothing to do with the fact that I can 'ssh' into a 'shell' on
sourceforge.  I don't really know.

But I was waiting to hear, on the sf bug ticket, if Earnie had or plans
to take any action.  Until *something* changes, I can't upload the files.

--
Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2

headers

Keith Marshall | 9 Apr 17:36

Re: dos2unix

Chuck,

On 09/04/12 16:19, Charles Wilson wrote:
> Yes, I will -- but *supposedly* I'm waiting on Earnie to bump my "role"
> from "release technician" to "shell access" since that's what SF support
> says we need to do, in order to upload stuff now.
> 
> Never mind that I already HAVE shell access, and still can't upload stuff.
> 
> Now, maybe this is just a terminology thing. And a "shell access role"
> has nothing to do with the fact that I can 'ssh' into a 'shell' on
> sourceforge.  I don't really know.

AFAICT, you already have all the privilege you should need -- you're a
project administrator, so you have exactly the same level of privilege
as I, or Earnie, or Cesar; you should have sufficient clout to bump
status for yourself, or any other project member.  The only thing you
can't do by yourself, AFAIK, is drop your own administrator status.

> But I was waiting to hear, on the sf bug ticket, if Earnie had or plans
> to take any action.  Until *something* changes, I can't upload the files.

If you can't do so, then it just doesn't work as SF say it should.
Perhaps you should add your own comment to Earnie's ticket, and tell
Chris Tsai that he's talking from his posterior.

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 9 Apr 17:38

Re: dos2unix

Charles Wilson schreef, Op 9-4-2012 17:19:
> On 4/9/2012 11:06 AM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>> Thanks Keith. It works (see below). So I think we can say now that the
>> xml files are correct. Charles, you said you wanted to do the initial
>> installation and changes of the xml files...
> Yes, I will -- but *supposedly* I'm waiting on Earnie to bump my "role"
> from "release technician" to "shell access" since that's what SF support
> says we need to do, in order to upload stuff now.
>
> Never mind that I already HAVE shell access, and still can't upload stuff.
>
> Now, maybe this is just a terminology thing. And a "shell access role"
> has nothing to do with the fact that I can 'ssh' into a 'shell' on
> sourceforge.  I don't really know.
>
> But I was waiting to hear, on the sf bug ticket, if Earnie had or plans
> to take any action.  Until *something* changes, I can't upload the files.
>
>

It should be possible via the WebUI, isn't it? Not so long ago I 
uploaded the dos2unix packages via the web browser.

regards,

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 9 Apr 18:51

Re: dos2unix

On 09/04/12 16:19, Charles Wilson wrote:
> I can't upload the files.

It seems unlikely that you would make this statement, without testing
the hypothesis, but...

I just used sftp to upload a fresh copy of msys-rxvt.xml.lzma, from my
local sandbox, to replace the original copy owned by you, (hopefully
without actually changing its content).  That seemed to be successful.
The ownership is still shown as yours, but the timestamp does show that
the file has been updated, and the WebUI confirms that it is new,
(within the last ten minutes).

Maybe I can do this because I own the directory, and you can't because
you don't.  I don't know, but this does seem strange...

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2

headers

Charles Wilson | 9 Apr 20:23

Re: dos2unix

On 4/9/2012 12:51 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> Maybe I can do this because I own the directory, and you can't because
> you don't.  I don't know, but this does seem strange...

I haven't made another attempt since the original report. I will try
this again tonight...Knowing sf, I wouldn't be surprised if something
was "silently" fixed between then and now. ("who, us? Everything should
be fine! And always has been!)

--
Chuck

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2

headers

Charles Wilson | 10 Apr 05:17

Re: dos2unix

On 4/9/2012 2:23 PM, Charles Wilson wrote:
> On 4/9/2012 12:51 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
>> Maybe I can do this because I own the directory, and you can't because
>> you don't.  I don't know, but this does seem strange...
>
> I haven't made another attempt since the original report. I will try
> this again tonight...Knowing sf, I wouldn't be surprised if something
> was "silently" fixed between then and now. ("who, us? Everything should
> be fine! And always has been!)

sftp uploads (of new files, and overwriting old files) works now...even 
if/when I don't actually own the target file or directory, nor have the 
appropriate unix perms.

 From an ssh session, I was also able to delete 
mingw32-cygutils.xml.lzma (but I owned that file, so it's not a good test).

So..."it" appears to now be working.  It wasn't a few days ago; I got 
access denied errors of some kind (don't recall the exact message at 
this late date).  Go figure.

As long as we're happy to promote all the Release Technicians to Shell 
Access, I guess sf can close the ticket.

FWIW, I've checked in all the new mingw-dist files and uploaded the 
modified .lzma elements...so, congrats to Erwin: dos2unix has now 
officially replaced cygutils-dos2unix for both mingw32 and msys. Sorry 
for the ordeal and thanks for your patience; isn't it fun to be a 
trailblazer?

(Continue reading)

headers

waterlan | 10 Apr 09:04

Re: dos2unix

On 2012-04-10 05:17, Charles Wilson wrote:

> FWIW, I've checked in all the new mingw-dist files and uploaded the
> modified .lzma elements...so, congrats to Erwin: dos2unix has now
> officially replaced cygutils-dos2unix for both mingw32 and msys. 
> Sorry
> for the ordeal and thanks for your patience; isn't it fun to be a
> trailblazer?
>

It is a lot of fun :)

Thanks Charles and Keith for the support!

Wrt to dos2unix, mingw/msys is now on par with Cygwin and practically 
all Linux distributions. Which means it is command-line compatible, 
which is handy when dos2unix is used in scripts. Redhat, Suse, and 
Gentoo use this implementation from the start. Many other Linux 
distributions switched lately (Debian, Ubuntu, Mint, Mandriva, ...)

best regards,

--

-- 
Erwin Waterlander
http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second 
resolution app monitoring today. Free.

(Continue reading)

headers

Earnie Boyd | 9 Apr 20:24

Re: dos2unix

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
> On 09/04/12 16:19, Charles Wilson wrote:
>> I can't upload the files.
>
> It seems unlikely that you would make this statement, without testing
> the hypothesis, but...
>

And if you have tested the "hypothesis" please comment on the ticket.

--

-- 
Earnie
-- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2

headers

Keith Marshall | 15 Apr 15:41

Re: dos2unix

On 09/04/12 16:06, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> Thanks Keith. It works (see below). So I think we can say now that the 
> xml files are correct.

Uhmm ... not quite!

  $ ./mingw-get install msys-dos2unix
  install: dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-bin.tar.lzma
   installing dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-bin.tar.lzma
  install: dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-doc.tar.lzma
   installing dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-doc.tar.lzma
  install: dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-lic.tar.lzma
   installing dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-lic.tar.lzma

Okay, thus far, but (after patching mingw-get to apply the wild-card for
subsystem version, as mentioned elsewhere, when the user doesn't specify
it explicitly, and correcting a couple of other defects) ...

  $ ./mingw-get upgrade msys-dos2unix=1.3.4-4
  mingw-get: *** WARNING *** http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw
  /cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma?download: opened
  with unexpected status: code = 404
  mingw-get: *** WARNING *** please report this to the mingw-get
  maintainer
  mingw-get: *** ERROR *** Get package:
  http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw/cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-
  msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma?download: download failed
  mingw-get: *** WARNING *** http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/mingw
  /cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-lic.tar.lzma?download: opened
  with unexpected status: code = 404

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 15 Apr 17:37

Re: dos2unix

Op 15-4-2012 15:41, Keith Marshall schreef:
> ...it is *not* a good solution; it binds the cygutils-doc and -lic
> components too tightly to msys-dos2unix, such that the -doc and -lic
> components of the latter will *supplant* those of the former, when what
> is really required is that they *complement* them.  A better solution,
> which I have gone ahead and implemented, is illustrated by the second
> attached patch, msys-dos2unix-20120415-2.xml.diff; this retains the
> over-qualified -doc and -lic component names, but declares them as
> virtual (meta) packages, (by virtue of<download tarname="none" />),
> then causes them to require the equivalent real package components.
>
>    $ ./mingw-get upgrade msys-dos2unix=1.3.4-4
>    upgrade: cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-bin.tar.lzma
>     removing release dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-bin.tar.lzma
>     installing cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-bin.tar.lzma
>    install: cygutils-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma
>     installing cygutils-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma
>    upgrade: cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma
>     removing release dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-doc.tar.lzma
>     installing cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-doc.tar.lzma
>    install: cygutils-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-lic.tar.lzma
>     installing cygutils-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-lic.tar.lzma
>    upgrade: cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-lic.tar.lzma
>     removing release dos2unix-5.3.3-1-msys-1.0.17-lic.tar.lzma
>     installing cygutils-dos2unix-1.3.4-4-msys-1.0.13-lic.tar.lzma
>
Hi,

Looks good.

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 5 Apr 16:00

Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

On 4/4/2012 1:03 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:

> I made the changes that Charles proposed. A new xml file is at 
> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/
> 
> I want to test it, but I don't know how to 'rollback' to an older 
> version with mingw-get.

I've integrated the latest version with mingw-dist, and it all seems to
work as expected.  I was trying to upload, but...there are permission
problems on the server.  Some of the following are unrelated to my
current problem, but they still need to be fixed.

Here is what I *would* need for *EVERYBODY* to do, if it actually worked.

   ssh -t $USER,mingw@... create
   cd /home/frs/project/mingw
   find . -user $USER -print0 | xargs -0 chgrp mingw
   find . -type d -user $USER ! -perm /g+w -print0 |\
      xargs -0 chmod 775
   find . -type f -user $USER ! -perm /g+w -print0 |\
      xargs -0 chmod 664

...where "everybody" ALSO includes the user whose login id is "dummy".
Thanks, sourceforge admins, that's really helpful!

However, (1) everything appears to have 'root' group ownership, and (2)
we don't seem to be able to actually change the group to *our* group
('mingw').  That means that group write permission is
meaningless...which means that NOBODY except the original creator of a

(Continue reading)

headers

Earnie Boyd | 5 Apr 16:38

Re: Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
>
> ...where "everybody" ALSO includes the user whose login id is "dummy".
> Thanks, sourceforge admins, that's really helpful!

And some are owned by some unnamed user with only an UID showing.

>
> However, (1) everything appears to have 'root' group ownership, and (2)
> we don't seem to be able to actually change the group to *our* group
> ('mingw').  That means that group write permission is
> meaningless...which means that NOBODY except the original creator of a
> directory can ever upload anything TO that directory, or create a subdir
> underneath it.
>
> That's so completely broken that I don't even have the words.
>
> Earnie, can you report this to the admins? At the very least, they
> should do the following:
>   cd /home/frs/project/mingw
>   chgrp -R mingw *

I tried this, no complaint but nothing changed.

>   chmod -R g+w *

Ditto.

>   find . -user dummy -print0 | xargs chown earnie
I didn't try this one because it should not work.

(Continue reading)

headers

Charles Wilson | 5 Apr 19:24

Re: Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

On 4/5/2012 10:38 AM, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Charles Wilson wrote:
>>
>> ...where "everybody" ALSO includes the user whose login id is "dummy".
>> Thanks, sourceforge admins, that's really helpful!
> 
> And some are owned by some unnamed user with only an UID showing.

It seems that, when logged into an interactive session, they only copy
your OWN uid/gid into your local chroot /etc/passwd -- so only the files
you own show an actual username; everything else shows the numeric UID.
 If you use sftp, then the other UIDs are correctly translated to their
real user name.  Except for 'dummy', which is always 'dummy'.

>> Earnie, can you report this to the admins? At the very least, they
>> should do the following:
>>   cd /home/frs/project/mingw
>>   chgrp -R mingw *
> 
> I tried this, no complaint but nothing changed.

Exactly, which is why "they" need to do it as root.

>>   chmod -R g+w *
> 
> Ditto.

ditto ditto.
> 
>>   find . -user dummy -print0 | xargs chown earnie

(Continue reading)

headers

Erwin Waterlander | 5 Apr 22:00

Re: Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

Charles Wilson schreef, Op 5-4-2012 16:00:
> On 4/4/2012 1:03 PM, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
>
>> I made the changes that Charles proposed. A new xml file is at
>> http://waterlan.home.xs4all.nl/mingw/dos2unix/
>>
>> I want to test it, but I don't know how to 'rollback' to an older
>> version with mingw-get.
> I've integrated the latest version with mingw-dist, and it all seems to
> work as expected.  I was trying to upload, but...there are permission
> problems on the server.  Some of the following are unrelated to my
> current problem, but they still need to be fixed.
>
> Here is what I *would* need for *EVERYBODY* to do, if it actually worked.
>
>     ssh -t $USER,mingw@... create
>     cd /home/frs/project/mingw
>     find . -user $USER -print0 | xargs -0 chgrp mingw
>     find . -type d -user $USER ! -perm /g+w -print0 |\
>        xargs -0 chmod 775
>     find . -type f -user $USER ! -perm /g+w -print0 |\
>        xargs -0 chmod 664
>
> ...where "everybody" ALSO includes the user whose login id is "dummy".
> Thanks, sourceforge admins, that's really helpful!
>
> However, (1) everything appears to have 'root' group ownership, and (2)
> we don't seem to be able to actually change the group to *our* group
> ('mingw').  That means that group write permission is
> meaningless...which means that NOBODY except the original creator of a

(Continue reading)

headers

Keith Marshall | 6 Apr 01:51

Re: Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

On 05/04/12 21:00, Erwin Waterlander wrote:
> Whatever I try, I can't change any permission. I don't get any error 
> message like "permission denied" or such.

Yet another SF cock-up!  I'm getting a strong feeling of deja vu here;
I've already been through the exercise of changing the permissions on
everything I own, just a few months ago.

IIRC, last time around everything was 644, owned by me, (or whoever
else), and the group was mingw.  I used sftp's 'chmod 664 *' to reset
everything I owned appropriately.  On that occasion, I got messages to
say that permissions were being changed for the files which I owned, and
error messages in respect of each file owned by others.  A subsequent
sftp 'ls -l' confirmed that 664 had been applied.

Today, I see that all permissions have reverted to 644, and that the
group has *changed* to root.  Furthermore, the sftp chmod command, which
did work previously, now reports success in respect of *every* file,
regardless of ownership, yet it actually does NOTHING AT ALL; every file
remains, stubbornly, at mode 644.

Somebody at SF should be keel-hauled, for this cock-up.  Earnie, do you
mind if I add a comment to your ticket, to this effect?

--

-- 
Regards,
Keith.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.

(Continue reading)

headers

Earnie Boyd | 6 Apr 14:37

Re: Yet another sf.net FRS problem [Was: Re: dos2unix]

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Keith Marshall wrote:
>
> Somebody at SF should be keel-hauled, for this cock-up.  Earnie, do you
> mind if I add a comment to your ticket, to this effect?
>

Of course not, go ahead.

--

-- 
Earnie
-- https://sites.google.com/site/earnieboyd

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second.
Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You.
Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2
_______________________________________________
MinGW-dvlpr mailing list
MinGW-dvlpr <at> lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-dvlpr