[GRASS-dev] Re: [GRASS-user] d.histogram in grass6.2

GRASS GIS GRASS GIS developer
1

Markus Neteler wrote:

I have triggered the GRASS 6.2.relbranch snapshot:
http://grass.itc.it/grass62/source/snapshot/

This will become 6.2.1, so testing is welcome.
Fixed done there are listed here:
http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/wiki/GRASS_6.2_Feature_Plan#6.2.1

Hi,

is it possible to create a 6.2.0 patchset at the same time? This would
be good for porting bug fixes to debian, as well as saving some bandwidth.

something like

cvs diff -r grass_6_2_0 -r releasebranch_6_2 \
  > grass-6.2.cvs_diff_snapshot_${DATE}
gzip grass-6.2.cvs_diff_snapshot_${DATE}

?? (I am not sure of the exact CVS command syntax)

Hamish

2

On Sun, Nov 12, 2006 at 04:54:31PM +1300, Hamish wrote:

Markus Neteler wrote:
>
> I have triggered the GRASS 6.2.relbranch snapshot:
> http://grass.itc.it/grass62/source/snapshot/
>
> This will become 6.2.1, so testing is welcome.
> Fixed done there are listed here:
> http://grass.gdf-hannover.de/wiki/GRASS_6.2_Feature_Plan#6.2.1

Hi,

is it possible to create a 6.2.0 patchset at the same time? This would
be good for porting bug fixes to debian, as well as saving some bandwidth.

something like

cvs diff -r grass_6_2_0 -r releasebranch_6_2 \
  > grass-6.2.cvs_diff_snapshot_${DATE}
gzip grass-6.2.cvs_diff_snapshot_${DATE}

?? (I am not sure of the exact CVS command syntax)

Done so:
http://grass.itc.it/grass62/source/snapshot/
-> grass-6.2.cvs_src_diffs_to_grass_6_2_0.diff.gz

this is now in the cronjob. If you have a better name suggestion,
please tell me.

thanks for the idea,
Markus

3

HB:

> is it possible to create a 6.2.0 patchset at the same time? This
> would be good for porting bug fixes to debian, as well as saving
> some bandwidth.

MN:

Done so:
http://grass.itc.it/grass62/source/snapshot/
-> grass-6.2.cvs_src_diffs_to_grass_6_2_0.diff.gz

thanks.

this is now in the cronjob. If you have a better name suggestion,
please tell me.

the name is very clear, but as cvs is a moving target having the date in
it is important. this makes the file name really long, but "grass_6_2_0"
could collapse to "620" without losing information.

Hamish