Message-Id: <3.0.1.16.19980331015802.27afd6b2@shadow.net>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 01:58:02 -0500
To: mert0407 AT sable DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot)
From: Ralph Proctor <ralphgpr AT shadow DOT net>
Subject: Re: Allegro 3.0 wip1?
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To: <35202f38.8244022@news.easynet.co.uk>
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 1 DOT 16 DOT 19980330130647 DOT 1b6fb6f8 AT shadow DOT net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

At 12:31 AM 3/31/98 GMT, you wrote:

>The diff-based WIP distribution will only work properly if you install
>it on top of what it expects to be installed over -- namely, the v3.0
>release.  Make sure you're not using a beta copy, and make sure you
>haven't done any hand modifications or WIP installations -- it must be
>a raw copy of v3.0.  The WIP distribution consists of a list of
>differences from the v3.0 release, and so 
>
>>Maybe I already have the patch installed in my version. Is there a clue
>>somewhere that would indicate just what version (including) patches I have?
>
>Look at the changelog file; it should tell you the version, date and
>recent changes.  You can compare this to the version on the Allegro
>web pages if you like.
>
>You've posted about this several times fairly vaguely.  Perhaps if you
>explain what the problems are exactly (e.g. what you thought needed
>changing in the makefile) someone could give a more accurate solution.
>I'm sorry if you've already done this and I missed it.
>
>1) Delete Allegro completely and reinstall v3.0 (not beta).
>
>2) Apply the difference using the patch utility.  Does it print any
>error messages?  Are there any rejected hunks?  If there are, you'll
>find that some of the modified files have their original version
>backed up as `foo.orig' and the list of rejected (i.e. unapplied)
>hunks (things that need changing) will be in `foo.rej', where `foo' is
>the filename.  I don't recall exactly how `patch' deals with this
>under DOS; the resulting filenames will be invalid.  I think it just
>strips the old extension and adds `ori' or `rej' as appropriate.
>
>3) Go to the Allegro directory and run "make".  Does it print any
>errors?  Does it get all the way to the end, where it prints a message
>saying that it was successful?  If "yes" to the first, what exactly
>did it say?  If "no" to the second, how far did it get?
>
>-- 
>george DOT foot AT merton DOT oxford DOT ac DOT uk

George, I shall convert the above to a text file and comply in the future.

I found the problem. I have been using the wrong WIPDIFF. I have been
struggling with the March 19 WIP when I should have waited until March 25.
I did not know there was a March 25 until tonight.

The correct version did a clean make right away--with no bad messages.

Please forgive the nuisance. Your patient words are appreciated.

Ralph
Ralph Proctor
Coral Gables, Florida
ralphgpr AT shadow DOT net
For one shining moment
we had Steve Wozniak.