Suggest to upgrade some software in base
noackjr at alumni.rice.edu
Sun Jun 27 11:52:28 PDT 2004
On 06/27/04 12:02, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 04:54:08PM +0200, Divacky Roman wrote:
>> I digged through our base system and looked for versions of
>> contributed soft. I found these program which could (and I think
>> should) be easily and painlessly upgraded (before 5.3 as 5-STABLE)
>> because they are outdated etc... these are:
>> file - 3.41 -> 4.09
>> Painless upgrade and the benefit is much newer magic file
> Only semi-painless. The code and how it is built has changed around a
> lot, else I would have upgraded it by now. That said, in progress; but
> lower priority than my toolchain work.
> And why does this have to happen before 5-STABLE? I can certainly MFC
> something like this.
Don't import until FILE 4.10 is released. I've submitted a patch to
Christos Zoulas for inclusion in 4.10 that *greatly* increases the
accuracy of FILE for FreeBSD. As soon as I see FILE 4.10 released (with
my patch), I'll be pleading for an import...
Included in the patch is correct detection of 4.10+ (4.10 ->
__FreeBSD_version = 491000) and printing of the __FreeBSD_version value
for executable built on a development branch.
Output of the patch for a wide range of test cases:
The submitted patch:
If you want to run this now (a patch against the version in tree):
Note that the -freebsd version of the patch is functionally the same as
the submitted patch but does not contain the updated comments.
More information about the freebsd-current