FS#944 - net-tools fails to build even with revised parch from #928 in PKGBUILD file

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by john lowell (jlowell) - Thursday, 27 May 2004, 00:09 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category System
Status Closed
Assigned To No-one
Architecture not specified
Severity Very Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 0.7 Wombat
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 0%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1mMaking package: net-tools (Wed May 26 19:52:57 EDT 2004)[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1mChecking Runtime Dependencies...[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1mChecking Buildtime Dependencies...[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1mRetrieving Sources...[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1m Downloading net-tools-1.60.tar.bz2[1;0m
--19:52:58-- http://www.tazenda.demon.co.uk/phil/net-tools/net-tools-1.60.tar.bz2
=> `net-tools-1.60.tar.bz2'
Resolving www.tazenda.demon.co.uk... 194.159.245.16
Connecting to www.tazenda.demon.co.uk[194.159.245.16]:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 198,520 [text/plain]

0K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 25% 116.59 KB/s
50K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 51% 332.40 KB/s
100K .......... .......... .......... .......... .......... 77% 202.23 KB/s
150K .......... .......... .......... .......... ... 100% 428.65 KB/s

19:52:59 (208.72 KB/s) - `net-tools-1.60.tar.bz2' saved [198520/198520]

[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1m Found net-tools.patch in build dir[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1m Found gcc340.patch in build dir[1;0m
[1;34m==>[1;0m [1;1mValidating source files with MD5sums[1;0m
net-tools-1.60.tar.bz2 ... Passed
net-tools.patch ... Passed
gcc340.patch ... FAILED
[1;31m==> ERROR:[1;0m [1;1mOne or more files did not pass the validity check![1;0m

herbrich, lets try this again. I replaced the gcc340.patch in /var/abs/base/net-tools with the one advertised as a fix and attached to bug #228. You can see the results above.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Judd Vinet (judd)
Thursday, 27 May 2004, 06:37 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by john lowell (jlowell) - Thursday, 27 May 2004, 00:58 GMT
Never mind, Dennis, I figured out the mystery. Close the bug. Why don't we just fix the PKGBUILD rather than requiring users to make repairs themselves? Is there some over-riding reason that that can't be done in this case?

Loading...