Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu!bob From: bob@tinman.cis.ohio-state.edu (Bob Sutterfield) Newsgroups: comp.windows.x Subject: Re: Xman and fixes Message-ID: Date: 7 Feb 89 22:00:28 GMT References: <8902062012.AA23419@DORA.MIT.EDU> <8902071739.AA00672@mizari.mitre.org> Sender: news@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Computer & Information Science Lines: 21 In-reply-to: deford@linus.UUCP's message of 7 Feb 89 17:39:14 GMT In article <8902071739.AA00672@mizari.mitre.org> deford@linus.UUCP (Kevin M. Deford) writes: It is very possible that I have the wrong version. I have what came on the tape... The problem was very similar to the person on the network. Is it possible that the version on the tape is incorrect? I think I'm that mysterious "person on the network", so let me put this to rest: I tried to apply the patches to the xman in our master source area and found that they didn't slip in very smoothly. After I screamed loudly in public (red face :-) I looked more closely and discovered that a local developer had been doing private development in the master source area. As soon as I recovered the original sources from the distribution, I had no problem at all applying the latest patches from Chris. That local developer has, hopefully, learned better source control habits by now... I am now of the firm belief that (at least in the case of these particular patches to xman) if you have the clean xman sources from the X11R3 distribution, you can easily apply the most recent xman patches (expo.lcs.mit.edu:pub/R3/fixes/fix[567]) and expect them to build cleanly.