Re: * Failed Patch: conf.diff !

[Aaron S. Hawley]

It seems you should send your bug report to the Gentoo GNU/Linux people,
because the problem is with this `emerge' softwre and the patches
provided by the distribution. /a

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005, Dale wrote:

> HI.  I use Gentoo and it gives a error when we, yes we, emerge
> rcs-5.7-r2.  This is what we get:
>
> > 13:24:00 (2.65 KB/s) - `/usr/portage/distfiles/rcs-5.7.tar.gz' saved
> > [282413/282413]
> >
> > >>> md5 src_uri ;-) rcs-5.7.tar.gz
> > >>> Unpacking source...
> > >>> Unpacking rcs-5.7.tar.gz to /var/tmp/portage/rcs-5.7-r2/work
> >  * Applying conf.diff ...
> >
> >  * Failed Patch: conf.diff !
> >  *  ( /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff )
> >  *
> >  * Include in your bugreport the contents of:
> >  *
> >  *   /var/tmp/portage/rcs-5.7-r2/temp/conf.diff-18154.out
> >
> >
> > !!! ERROR: app-text/rcs-5.7-r2 failed.
> > !!! Function epatch, Line 401, Exitcode 0
> > !!! Failed Patch: conf.diff!
> > !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status
> > message.
> >
> > address@hidden / #
>
>
> This is the file it says to post, you asked for it ;-) :
>
> > ***** conf.diff *****
> >
> > =====================
> >
> > PATCH COMMAND:  patch -p0 -g0 < /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff
> >
> > =====================
> > patching file src/conf.sh
> > Hunk #1 FAILED at 1.
> > 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file src/conf.sh.rej
> > =====================
> >
> > PATCH COMMAND:  patch -p1 -g0 < /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff
> >
> > =====================
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- src/conf.sh    1995-06-16 02:19:24.000000000 -0400
> > |+++ src.new/conf.sh    2002-06-17 12:49:10.000000000 -0400
> > --------------------------
> > No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
> > 4 out of 4 hunks ignored
> > =====================
> >
> > PATCH COMMAND:  patch -p2 -g0 < /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff
> >
> > =====================
> > missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- src/conf.sh    1995-06-16 02:19:24.000000000 -0400
> > |+++ src.new/conf.sh    2002-06-17 12:49:10.000000000 -0400
> > --------------------------
> > No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
> > 4 out of 4 hunks ignored
> > =====================
> >
> > PATCH COMMAND:  patch -p3 -g0 < /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff
> >
> > =====================
> > missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- src/conf.sh    1995-06-16 02:19:24.000000000 -0400
> > |+++ src.new/conf.sh    2002-06-17 12:49:10.000000000 -0400
> > --------------------------
> > No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
> > 4 out of 4 hunks ignored
> > =====================
> >
> > PATCH COMMAND:  patch -p4 -g0 < /usr/portage/app-text/rcs/files/conf.diff
> >
> > =====================
> > missing header for unified diff at line 3 of patch
> > can't find file to patch at input line 3
> > Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option?
> > The text leading up to this was:
> > --------------------------
> > |--- src/conf.sh    1995-06-16 02:19:24.000000000 -0400
> > |+++ src.new/conf.sh    2002-06-17 12:49:10.000000000 -0400
> > --------------------------
> > No file to patch.  Skipping patch.
> > 4 out of 4 hunks ignored
>
>
> We also have a thread here.
> <http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-316909.html>  If you have a fix,
> that would be way cool.  Meantime, emerge --resume --skipfirst.
>
> Thanks
> Dale

-- 
Consider supporting GNU Software and the Free Software Foundation
http://www.fsf.org/order/
                     (GNU and FSF are not responsible for this promotion
                  nor do they necessarily agree with the views of author)