From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: libpq host/hostaddr/conninfo inconsistencies |
Date: | 2018-08-24 19:25:31 |
Message-ID: | 25189.1535138731@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> writes:
> Attached is a rebase after 5ca00774.
I notice that the cfbot thinks that *none* of your pending patches apply
successfully. I tried this one locally and what I get is
$ patch -p1 <~/libpq-host-ip-2.patch
(Stripping trailing CRs from patch.)
patching file doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
(Stripping trailing CRs from patch.)
patching file src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
as compared to the cfbot report, in which every hunk is rejected:
=== applying patch ./libpq-host-ip-2.patch
Hmm... Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
|index 5e7931ba90..086172d4f0 100644
|--- a/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
|+++ b/doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml
--------------------------
Patching file doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 964.
Hunk #2 failed at 994.
2 out of 2 hunks failed--saving rejects to doc/src/sgml/libpq.sgml.rej
Hmm... The next patch looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff --git a/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c b/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
|index a8048ffad2..34025ba041 100644
|--- a/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
|+++ b/src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c
--------------------------
Patching file src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 failed at 908.
Hunk #2 failed at 930.
Hunk #3 failed at 943.
Hunk #4 failed at 974.
Hunk #5 failed at 1004.
Hunk #6 failed at 1095.
Hunk #7 failed at 2098.
Hunk #8 failed at 2158.
Hunk #9 failed at 6138.
9 out of 9 hunks failed--saving rejects to src/interfaces/libpq/fe-connect.c.rej
done
So I'm speculating that the cfbot is using a version of patch(1) that
doesn't have strip-trailing-CRs logic. Which bemuses me, because
I thought they all did.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavan Deolasee | 2018-08-24 19:26:17 | Re: Accidental removal of a file causing various problems |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2018-08-24 19:10:02 | Re: Windows vs C99 (was Re: C99 compliance for src/port/snprintf.c) |