From: Thomas Jost <schnouki@schnouki.net>
To: Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Rebase of Pieter's "set test prereqs"
In-Reply-To: <8739dneqra.fsf@praet.org>
References: <1320176954-4897-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org>
	<1321454035-22023-1-git-send-email-schnouki@schnouki.net>
	<8739dneqra.fsf@praet.org>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.10_rc1+21~gaf76c55 (http://notmuchmail.org)
	Emacs/24.0.90.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:14:11 +0100
Message-ID: <87aa7vawek.fsf@thor.loria.fr>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:50:17 +0100, Pieter Praet <pieter@praet.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:33:49 +0100, Thomas Jost <schnouki@schnouki.net> w=
rote:
> > Hello list,
> >=20
> > This is another rebased version of Pieter's series to add GPG and Emacs=
 as test
> > prereqs, plus some additions on my own. (Rebased and posted as requeste=
d by
> > Pieter [1].)
> >=20
>=20
> Thanks Thomas!
>=20
> Although... you may have misread (or maybe I mistyped :), but what I
> actually intended [1] was for you to rebase *only* your fixes on top of
> my rebased series (e.g. see "tjost-fixes.patch" in att), so you could
> receive proper credit for cleaning up my mess.

Oh, ok, I must have misread that :)=20

Right now your patches don't apply cleanly on master (conflict in patch
3 due to commit 5964a7), and I think that Dmitry's patches [1] may be a
better way to handle prereqs. So I probably won't send those patches
until we decide which approach is the way to go.

[1] id:"1321494986-18998-1-git-send-email-dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com"

> Also, while my apprehension [2,3] re the inclusion of the SCREEN/DTACH
> prereq in patches #4,5,6 didn't have much merit (it's an all-or-nothing
> affair anyways), the issue [3] in patch #5 @ "Reply within emacs" still
> stands: `sed' will run unconditionally, and treat "EMACS" as an input
> file.  (see "sed-prereq-fix.patch" in att).

Nice catch with this sed issue. Looks like I need to be more careful
when replacing "OUTPUT" with "EMACS OUTPUT"...

Thanks,

=2D-=20
Thomas/Schnouki

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJOxN50AAoJEMPdciX+bh5ICKIH/0Nn3r5OSBoRYa8s7oUW7Ez9
6gxxgxmO5ibeN00mk2GZdI7Btu66ruzoYhie0FuKEOahCq0TA4TTeC0H1D7oVRjl
U/HdP/pRk+5yk+VG+SDoPm/6C9ZRY3hwf/wC2317KlIpamq7KIoOo5FabtYJ38gR
b1U6Eo/YQGQ3B4X80hrp5ErSdvm3UTWCqk/j1guhUMDfbI2YGl0C1GYePimsrBOc
IF82XUNVLlirZn7mJQKGSEZj/6yG6jCITagIHgB1FqepX7WgY7TYQBgPB5AkuWyM
3CsP5VPb+bYsXFOY+VQgkmXkn0+xwydzK27kHuBhOjlDOgtjP1K0nQpCfQNBKM8=
=qVuP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--