On Mon 13 Aug 2018 at 07:09:41 +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > This patch ... indeed fixes the problem for me. > This is certainly not the right way to fix things, but as a quick fix to allow > pkg_chk -av to work, it seems adequate (at least as much as I can test > that, since I don't use pkg_chk and don't have a pkgchk.conf file with > anything meaningful in it). If you just have something like the following in it pkgtools/pkg_chk pkgtools/pkg_install pkgtools/pkgdiff pkgtools/pkgin pkgtools/nih you should be able to see the difference between broken and working. When working, pkg_chk -vak will print something like Variable: PKGNAME = pkg_chk-2.0.9 pkgtools/pkg_chk - pkg_chk-2.0.9 OK Variable: PKGNAME = pkg_install-20180425 pkgtools/pkg_install - pkg_install-20180325 < pkg_install-20180425 (has binary package) Variable: PKGNAME = pkgdiff-1.8nb1 pkgtools/pkgdiff - pkgdiff-1.8nb1 OK Variable: PKGNAME = pkgin-0.11.3 pkgtools/pkgin - pkgin-0.11.3 OK Variable: PKGNAME = nih-0.14.1 pkgtools/nih - nih-0.14.1 OK and after it has reported on the whole list of packages from pkgchk.conf it will try to build/install any that were out of date or missing. > I will push doing a proper fix for 48875 up my priority list, rather than > just letting it languish as an intellectual curiosity that ought be handled > sometime... Thanks! In the mean time I will keep the patched copy of sh as a spare but not for general use. > pps: while looking at this, I see a whole bunch of problems in the pkg_chk > script that ought to be fixed, but none of them are related to this particular > issue. You mean "need to be fixed in the script" or "need to be fixed in sh"? -Olaf. -- ___ Olaf 'Rhialto' Seibert -- Wayland: Those who don't understand X \X/ rhialto/at/falu.nl -- are condemned to reinvent it. Poorly.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature