Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 28 Feb 2014 09:00:49 +0300
From:      "Sergey V. Dyatko" <sergey.dyatko@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: pkg_libchk <package> is broken ?
Message-ID:  <20140228090049.4f59a096@laptop.minsk.domain>
In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1sYMfMThPSJeCdjckizNDJmcD3KGS42vyFg0SY=LA4axA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <20140227092634.46295890@laptop.minsk.domain> <20140227093218.0d6dd301@laptop.minsk.domain> <CAN6yY1sYMfMThPSJeCdjckizNDJmcD3KGS42vyFg0SY=LA4axA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 16:17:54 -0800
Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> wrote: 

> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:32 PM, Sergey V. Dyatko <tiger@agava.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 09:26:34 +0300
> > "Sergey V. Dyatko" <sergey.dyatko@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I use sysutils/bsdadminscripts for years, thanks Dominic. After
> > > switching to pkg[ng] I patch pkg_libchk for it ( pkg info with
> > > corresponding keys instead pkg_info, etc). After r308906 (IIRC) I
> > > revert local my patches. Today I spotted that pkg_libchk
> > > <package> is broken, for example:
> > >
> > > tiger# pkg_libchk -q
> > > compat9x-amd64-9.2.902000.201310
> > > diablo-jdk-1.6.0.07.02_20
> > > festival-2.1
> > > opera-12.16
> > >
> > > tiger# pkg_libchk -n festival\*
> > > tiger# pkg_libchk -n festival-2.1
> > > tiger#
> > >
> > seems '\' missing on line 411
> >
> > --- pkg_libchk.orig     2014-02-27 09:31:31.204449447 +0300
> > +++ pkg_libchk  2014-02-27 09:31:45.539441534 +0300
> > @@ -407,7 +407,7 @@
> >  # Get the packages to work on.
> >  test -z "$packages" && packages="-a"
> >  packages="$(pkg info -E $packages)"
> > -test -z "$recursive" -a -z "$Recursive" || packages="$packages
> > +test -z "$recursive" -a -z "$Recursive" || packages="$packages \
> >  $(pkg info -q $recursive $Recursive "$packages" 2> /dev/null | \
> >  sed -E 's|^@pkgdep[[:space:]]*||1')"
> >
> > --
> > wbr, tiger
> >
> 
> Isn't a '\' also needed on line 417?

Hi,
I don't think so. 
line 417 is comment :) (# The packages to check)


--
wbr, tiger




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140228090049.4f59a096>