Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.bugs.dist > #1134702

Bug#1029574: indent shebang bug and misses LFS support

Show all headers | View raw

El 24/1/23 a las 18:48, Helge Deller escribió:
> Package:  indent
> Version: 2.2.12
> Tags: hppa, patch, lfs, FTBFS
> 
> The indent package has a bug in the script "regression/TEST"
> which starts with "#/bin/sh" instead of a correct
> shebang which would be "#!/bin/sh". This leads to a FTBFS on
> the hppa architecture when running virtualized in qemu-user.
> 
> Secondly it would be nice if the indent tool would be built
> with large file support. Adding future=+lfs to DEB_BUILD_MAINT_OPTIONS
> allows that.
> 
> Both are fixed with attached patch. Please apply for next upload.

Thanks for the report and the patch.

I'm curious about the LFS issue: Is it really a good idea to have a .c
file larger than 2GB? I did a quick search and found this tweet:

https://twitter.com/cristalopes/status/776569616692752384

   The largest C++ file we found in GitHub has 528Mb, 57 lines of code.
   Contains the first 50,847,534 primes, all hard coded in an array.

So: What would be the rationale for adding LFS support to the indent program?
"Just in case"?


Another question: I see there are now several ways to enable LFS. In procmail
I had this in debian/rules:

CFLAGS := $(shell dpkg-buildflags --get CFLAGS) $$(getconf LFS_CFLAGS)

Is that equivalent to using future=+lfs or are there any differences?

Thanks.

Back to linux.debian.bugs.dist | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Bug#1029574: indent shebang bug and misses LFS support Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> - 2023-01-24 19:00 +0100
  Bug#1029574: indent shebang bug and misses LFS support Santiago Vila <sanvila@debian.org> - 2023-01-24 20:20 +0100
    Bug#1029574: indent shebang bug and misses LFS support Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de> - 2023-01-24 21:10 +0100

csiph-web