gnupic: Thread: Re: [gnupic] gputils CVS->SVN

Le dimanche 28 octobre 2007, David a écrit :
> Good news! We're finally getting gputils migrated to SVN like I keep
> promising.
>
> Sourceforge says it can take anywhere from 1-3 hours to 24 depending on
> project size and how many other projects are in the queue, but unless
> I've made a stupid mistake like put the trunk/ contents at the top
> level (or the opposite, made a trunk/trunk), expect to see it up by 9pm
> GMT on Mon 29 Oct.

SVN Repository is already avaliable ;-)

I posted two patches for man pages on the tracker
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=41924&atid=431667
Please, could you commit its?

Regards,
Alain
-- 
Les pages de manuel Linux en français
http://manpagesfr.free.fr/

David wrote:
> Good news! We're finally getting gputils migrated to SVN like I keep
> promising.
>
> Sourceforge says it can take anywhere from 1-3 hours to 24 depending on
> project size and how many other projects are in the queue, but unless
> I've made a stupid mistake like put the trunk/ contents at the top
> level (or the opposite, made a trunk/trunk), expect to see it up by 9pm
> GMT on Mon 29 Oct.
>
> I apologize it's taken this long, but hopefully now we can bring gputils
> into a new generation of development and a new level of quality.
>
> David Barnett
>   
Great!

My first observations: object files pageselw2.o and sx.o in 
gpasm\testsuite\gpasm.project\objfiles have wrong svn properties svn:eol-
style=native, svn:keywords="Author Date Id Revision, svn:executable=*. 
They should be removed and the property 
svn:mime-type=application/octet-stream should be added.

This is not a problem on Linux, but it is on Windows, since LFs (0x0a) 
are converted to CR LF (0x0d 0x0a) in object files.

Borut

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 22:15:26 +0100
Borut Razem ####@####.#### wrote:

> David wrote:
> > Good news! We're finally getting gputils migrated to SVN like I keep
> > promising.
> > ...
> Great!
> 
> My first observations: object files pageselw2.o and sx.o in 
> gpasm\testsuite\gpasm.project\objfiles have wrong svn properties
Fixed in SVN (r495).

Out of curiosity, how did you discover the problem? Did you go looking
for it or did it bite you?

Thanks for pointing it out.

David Barnett

On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:48:13 +0100
Alain PORTAL ####@####.#### wrote:

> I posted two patches for man pages on the tracker
> https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=41924&atid=431667
> Please, could you commit its?
Fixed in SVN (r497,498).

Thanks for being on top of things and sending these changes in so
quickly, guys.

David Barnett

David wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 22:15:26 +0100
> Borut Razem ####@####.#### wrote:
>
>   
>> David wrote:
>>     
>>> Good news! We're finally getting gputils migrated to SVN like I keep
>>> promising.
>>> ...
>>>       
>> Great!
>>
>> My first observations: object files pageselw2.o and sx.o in 
>> gpasm\testsuite\gpasm.project\objfiles have wrong svn properties
>>     
> Fixed in SVN (r495).
>
> Out of curiosity, how did you discover the problem? Did you go looking
> for it or did it bite you?
>
>   

I manually checked the svn properties of each file...

Just joking :-) . I just checked out the svn snapshot on Windows and 
recursively compared all files with the cvs version, and the problem 
popped out by itself.

Borut

Hi David,

I think that svn transition has been successfully done and that the svn 
repository is stable, so I suggest to update the gputils web page 
http://gputils.sourceforge.net/ and replace all references to CVS with 
references to svn.

I also suggest to disable the CVS repository on SourceForge project page 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gputils. Currently both CVS and SVN 
repository are shown in the Code tab, which is confusing.


About the wrong version info: I suggest to create a new release package 
named gputils-0.13.5-1 and put it to the SF file release, replacing the 
wrong one.

I also saw that you didn't create the Linux rpm and Windows setup 
packages. I propose to create at least the windows setup. If you need 
help, I can do it.


Borut


David wrote:
> Good news! We're finally getting gputils migrated to SVN like I keep
> promising.
>
> Sourceforge says it can take anywhere from 1-3 hours to 24 depending on
> project size and how many other projects are in the queue, but unless
> I've made a stupid mistake like put the trunk/ contents at the top
> level (or the opposite, made a trunk/trunk), expect to see it up by 9pm
> GMT on Mon 29 Oct.
>
> I apologize it's taken this long, but hopefully now we can bring gputils
> into a new generation of development and a new level of quality.
>
> David Barnett
>   

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 14:02:45 +0100
Borut Razem ####@####.#### wrote:

> Hi David,
> 
> I think that svn transition has been successfully done and that the
> svn repository is stable, so I suggest to update the gputils web page 
> http://gputils.sourceforge.net/ and replace all references to CVS
> with references to svn.
> 
> I also suggest to disable the CVS repository on SourceForge project
> page http://sourceforge.net/projects/gputils. Currently both CVS and
> SVN repository are shown in the Code tab, which is confusing.
You're right, that could confuse people. I disabled the CVS repository
on the SourceForge page. I can probably grep through the web page
sometime tomorrow and remove the CVS references.

> About the wrong version info: I suggest to create a new release
> package named gputils-0.13.5-1 and put it to the SF file release,
> replacing the wrong one.
Actually, it's not as complicated as that. I *did* update the version
number for the release, and I distinctly remember committing it to CVS,
but somehow either I forgot after all or it failed and I didn't notice.
Either way, the version number is wrong in CVS and SVN, but if you check
the release, it does report the correct 0.13.5 version number. I just
needed to fix it in SVN (r504).

> I also saw that you didn't create the Linux rpm and Windows setup 
> packages. I propose to create at least the windows setup. If you need 
> help, I can do it.
That's right. I've never created either rpms or Windows installers
before. I'm sure I could figure out how if I got to it, but I actually
had you in mind to take care of it if you have a chance.

David Barnett

David wrote:
> I also saw that you didn't create the Linux rpm and Windows setup
>> packages. I propose to create at least the windows setup. If you need 
>> help, I can do it.
>>     
> That's right. I've never created either rpms or Windows installers
> before. I'm sure I could figure out how if I got to it, but I actually
> had you in mind to take care of it if you have a chance.
>   

The Windows setup is at 
http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/tmp/gputils-0.13.5-1.exe, created it from 
release sources. Please put it to gputils file releases and let me know 
when you'll do it, so that I can remove it.


Borut

David,

I submitted the patch #1829933 for scripts/build/mingw/make-mingw 
script. Please apply it.

Borut


Borut Razem wrote:
> David wrote:
>> I also saw that you didn't create the Linux rpm and Windows setup
>>> packages. I propose to create at least the windows setup. If you 
>>> need help, I can do it.
>>>     
>> That's right. I've never created either rpms or Windows installers
>> before. I'm sure I could figure out how if I got to it, but I actually
>> had you in mind to take care of it if you have a chance.
>>   
>
> The Windows setup is at 
> http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/tmp/gputils-0.13.5-1.exe, created it from 
> release sources. Please put it to gputils file releases and let me 
> know when you'll do it, so that I can remove it.
>
>
> Borut

On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:27:36 +0100
Borut Razem ####@####.#### wrote:

> The Windows setup is at 
> http://sdcc.sourceforge.net/tmp/gputils-0.13.5-1.exe, created it from 
> release sources. Please put it to gputils file releases and let me
> know when you'll do it, so that I can remove it.
The Windows installer is up in the file releases now. I did notice that
this binary is a lot bigger than the previous release (1959344 vs.
477235)... it's probably nothing but I thought I'd mention it. You can
take a look and make sure I set it up right and it's not corrupted, and
then you can take down the sdcc mirror.

BTW, I also applied your patch for cross-compiling from Linux with the
mingw script (r505).

David Barnett