Re: [Chicken-hackers] address@hidden: Re: 4.8.0 release?]

[Felix]

From: Mario Domenech Goulart <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] address@hidden: Re: 4.8.0 release?]
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 14:12:35 -0400

> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 20:14:42 +0200 (CEST) Felix <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> From: Mario Domenech Goulart <address@hidden>
>> Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] address@hidden: Re: 4.8.0 release?]
>> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 11:46:37 -0400
>>
>>> On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 00:03:40 -0400 John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Mario Domenech Goulart scripsit:
>>>>
>>>>>  # for cygwin
>>>>> -test -f ../cygchicken-0.dll && cp ../cygchicken-0.dll .
>>>>> +if test -f ../cygchicken-0.dll; then
>>>>> +    cp ../cygchicken-0.dll .
>>>>> +    cp ../cygchicken-0.dll reverser/tags/1.0
>>>>> +fi
>>>>> +mv ../cygchicken-0.dll ../cygchicken-0.dll_
>>>>
>>>> All these copies and moves, including the last, need to be inside the
>>>> scope of the "if test -f", or it's not idempotent.
>>> 
>>> Indeed, John.  Thanks for noticing that.  Attached is an updated version
>>> of the patch.
>>> 
>>> I tested it on master, and I could "make ... spotless install check"
>>> successfully.
>>
>> Does that mean the deployment test succeeded?
> 
> Yes.

Excellent. Shall I sign it off and apply it to master?


cheers,
felix