[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: processing order, preprocessing, etc.

From: Thomas Glanzmann
Subject: Re: processing order, preprocessing, etc.
Date: 23 Dec 2002 23:23:11 GMT
User-agent: slrn/ (Linux)

> I would love to put these on the main site. I have never
> managed to get anyone to send me just say the word.
> Or suggest how we could make it easier so as to encourage folks.

There must be the possibility to 'look' at directory trees. Otherwise the whole
thing is unusable, at least for my configuration.

So if you want to publish my configruation just drop me an eMail.

It would be nice if there would be one directory per configuration on your

>From address@hidden Mon Dec 23 19:07:06 2002
Received: from list by with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
        id 18QcbC-0004KO-00
        for address@hidden; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:07:06 -0500
Received: from mail by with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13)
        id 18QcaP-0003l1-00
        for address@hidden; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:06:19 -0500
Received: from ([])
        by with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13)
        id 18QcZe-0003Ti-00
        for address@hidden; Mon, 23 Dec 2002 19:05:31 -0500
Received: from ( [])
        by (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id gBO05QKR014774;
        Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:05:26 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <address@hidden>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4
To: "Brian E. Seppanen" <address@hidden>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 23 Dec 2002 13:43:13 EST."
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 16:04:25 -0800
From: Marion Hakanson <address@hidden>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.25 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang)
cc: address@hidden
Subject: Re: File Name Limitation in Secure Copy 
X-BeenThere: address@hidden
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users list for GNU cfengine  <>
List-Help: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Post: <mailto:address@hidden>
List-Subscribe: <>,
List-Archive: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>,
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 00:07:07 -0000

> Reversing the order of occurence such that the longer file names occurred
> first seems to have corrected the situation.   Is there a pattern match
> that is being satisfied prior to completion in the previous scenario, that
> needs to be avoided in the future?

Check to make sure you have the most recent 2.0.5pre2;  I ran across
three different ones, depending on when you downloaded it.  The first
one had a bug which sounds a lot like the behavior you describe (running
with "-d 0" would show macro values getting part of an earlier, longer
macro definition).


Marion Hakanson <address@hidden>
CSE Computing Facilities

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]