Re: please review baler and eor
Jan Šmydke <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.pkgsrc.wip.review |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <20110327173438.533696c1@gaspard> |
Thank you for your comments - all fixed. I hope the DESTDIR support in eor now works as you expected. par2 is very good, yet too sophisticated and seemed not to be maintained more(?). EOR, by contrast, brings simplicity so that even if EOR is no longer mantained, a user does not have to worry about his data, because anyone can write EOR easily again :-) Similar idea brought Baler (vs too sophisticated dar & comp ...) Jan On Sun, 27 Feb 2011 15:42:28 +0100 Thomas Klausner <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 07:11:27PM +0100, Jan Šmydke wrote: > > I decided not to use cmake at all so now eor uses a plain > > GNUmakefile only. > > > > Could you please review it again? > > eor doesn't work with destdir installs. > install -m 755 eor /usr/pkg/bin/eor > install: /usr/pkg/bin/eor: open: Permission denied > > It should install to ${DESTDIR}${PREFIX}/bin then it would probably > work. > > baler/patches/patch-aa should have a comment, e.g. "Fix destdir > installation." > > Otherwise, they look fine. > > Have you looked at archivers/par2? It does something similar, but uses > more complex algorithms and probably needs less extra data than eor. > Thomas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Enable your software for Intel(R) Active Management Technology to meet the growing manageability and security demands of your customers. Businesses are taking advantage of Intel(R) vPro (TM) technology - will your software be a part of the solution? Download the Intel(R) Manageability Checker today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmar _______________________________________________ pkgsrc-wip-review mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pkgsrc-wip-review