Hi,
First thanks again Dan for your help. I discovered the problem with
the config_parse.pl-resend.1 patch script. The script actually contained
patches for two different pieces of code. The top part of the patch was for
config_parse.pl and the bottom was for resend. I created two patch files from
this one patch file and reran patch for config_parse.pl and resend. I received
no errors this time and the patches took.
Thanks again for your help.
Dave
> From dliston@netscape.com Mon Feb 26 14:44:01 2001
> Received: from otto.nawcad.navy.mil (otto-internal.nawcad.navy.mil [192.58.199.212])
> by tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA07188
> for <davea@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil>; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:43:59 -0500 (EST)
> Received: by otto.nawcad.navy.mil; id OAA02519; Mon, 26 Feb 2001 14:43:59 -0500 (EST)
> Received: from unknown(24.116.56.30) by otto.nawcad.navy.mil via smap (V4.2)
> id xma001606; Mon, 26 Feb 01 14:43:42 -0500
> Received: from netscape.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
> by daniel.sonny.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA02852;
> Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:43:42 -0600
> Sender: dliston@netscape.com
> Message-ID: <3A9AB1EE.EC28E9FD@netscape.com>
> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 13:43:42 -0600
> From: "D. Liston" <dliston@netscape.com>
> Organization: iPlanet E-Commerce Solutions, A Sun Netscape Alliance
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-3 i686)
> X-Accept-Language: en
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> To: davea@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
> CC: majordomo-users@greatcircle.com
> Subject: Re: path installation problems
> References: <200102222001.PAA26803@patty.nawcad.navy.mil>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> If you want to try to patch a file by hand, you can read the patch file in one
> window and do the editing in another. The first two lines of the file refer to
> the files used to create the patch (or diff) file. In this case, config_parse.pl.
> (modified) and a copy of the original file, config_parse.pl.orig.
>
> Next, is a separator line, the line numbers of the original file followed by new
> line numbers related to the changed file. This is good only as a starting
> reference when dealing with already modified files. You can use the next three
> lines to confirm location when you find an "exact" match. Lines with - signs are
> removed and lines with + signs are added. Lastly, there are three more lines of
> unmodified text to verify you are in the right location.
>
> If this makes you uncomfortable in any way, do not attempt hand patching the code.
> If you are the adventurous type, make sure to keep working backups.
>
> *** config_parse.pl.orig Fri Jan 7 06:00:26 2000
> --- config_parse.pl Sun Jun 4 05:12:35 2000
> ***************
> *** 130,135 ****
> --- 130,138 ----
> 'subject_prefix', '', # prefix for the subject line
> 'taboo_headers', '', # if a header matches, review message
> 'taboo_body', '', # if body matches, review message
> + 'non_member_bounce', "\001sender\001sender-owner\001#!\$default_non_member_bounce ? \$default_non_member_bounce : ''",
> + # non_member_bounce is sent to
> +
> # stuff for digest below
> 'digest_volume', '1',
> 'digest_issue', '1',
> [snip]
> above pasted only for visual effect and is not the complete file.
>
> Dan Liston
>
> davea@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have majordomo 1.94.5 on a Solaris 2.6 box. I downloaded a number of
> > patches from ftp.ccsf.org/majordomo-patches/1.94.5/majordomo.pl. Most of
> > the patch installations went well. But two of them are giving me fits.
> > I'm not a perl person yet, but, this majordomo is making me a fast learner.
> > Can someone explain what is going on with these patches and possible work arounds? I believe I know what needs to be done, I just need some clarification.
> >
> > # patch config_parse.pl < config_parse.pl-resend.1
> > Looks like a new-style context diff.
> > The next patch looks like a new-style context diff.
> > Hunk #1 failed at line 564.
> > Hunk #2 failed at line 918.
> > 2 out of 2 hunks failed: saving rejects to config_parse.pl.rej
> >
> > #patch majordomo.pl < majordomo.pl.1
> > Looks like a unified context diff.
> > Hunk #1 failed at line 173.
> > Hunk #2 failed at line 185.
> > 2 out of 2 hunks failed: saving rejects to majordomo.pl.rej
> > I can't seem to find a patch in there anywhere.
|
|
