Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 220317
The version marked as 1.9.18 is not 1.9.18, newer version available
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:51 EST
The rpm version is 1.9.18, but the sources are some old 1.9.18-pre. The project
seems unmaintained for quite a long time so I think we could probably take the
current CVS sources (which are more than 2 years old anyway) and release an
update. They fix some issues. I'm attaching my srpm.
Created attachment 144093 [details]
Why do you claim the sources are 1.9.18-pre?
Because there was a tarball of 1.9.18-pre6 available to download a year or two
ago and the changelog contained more entries than your one does. (and still less
entries than the cvs changelog does, which is, if i understand correctly, still
not final 1.9.18)
I don't know which 1.9.18-pre6 tarball you're talking about, but the one in
http://hnb.sourceforge.net/.files/ is definitely older than full 1.9.18 in the
same directory. There are no newer tarballs.
This is a real fun. The 1.9.18 is lacking half the features of pre6, according
to changelog/diff. So I have no clue what is the right version and what to do :).
I compared all the tarballs in that directory and it seems that pre7 tarball
contains the newest code. Can you confirm that it has the missing features?
OK, I've just found a patch in Debian package that seems to add some more
features and fixes some compiler warnings:
I can add that one, too.
Well, pre7 isn't still as new as the CVS one. And the debian patch appears to
address different issues. I forked the project though, planning to do some
development of my wishes etc., so I probably don't care much anymore. Thanks for
the time you spent investigating, anyway.
Having an active upstream is a good thing. I have no problem with switching to
your fork. However, I don't want to package a CVS snapshot of unknown origin. If
you have a website for your hnb fork somewhere and it has a tarball available,
I'll be happy to package that. I guess the original author has lost interest in
developing hnb. I haven't received any reply to my e-mails from him.
Yeah, I haven't received reply to my mails (it might be more than 2 years now)
neither. I don't have a website yet, but I think I might create one after I
achieve a few goals and release a tarball. I will let you know.
I noticed that you switched to pre7 and applied the debian patch recently, so
I'm closing this report as it effectively fixes it.
Btw, the debian patch introduced a bug in editing -- the cursor no longer marks
the place where the logical cursor is, the highlight is always at the end of the
node. I found this when I was reviewing the patch for applying to my fork. This
is fixed in my tree.
And I finally managed to make some commits and release a version. It's available