From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ricardo Wurmus <ricardo.wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>
Subject: Re: Update mafft to 7.245.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:47:53 +0100
Message-ID: <idja8p96y2u.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
References: <5641E082.90801@uq.edu.au> <20151110151207.6c5e4693@debian-netbook>
	<56426E2B.10405@uq.edu.au>
	<idjbn9y8ek6.fsf@bimsb-sys02.mdc-berlin.net>
	<567001F0.7060206@uq.edu.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51998)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Ricardo.Wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>) id 1a9Xya-00082c-6W
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 07:48:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Ricardo.Wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>) id 1a9XyX-0004CT-0E
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 07:48:08 -0500
Received: from sinope.bbbm.mdc-berlin.de ([141.80.25.23]:44746)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Ricardo.Wurmus@mdc-berlin.de>) id 1a9XyW-0004CD-OE
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 07:48:04 -0500
In-Reply-To: <567001F0.7060206@uq.edu.au>
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Ben Woodcroft <b.woodcroft@uq.edu.au>
Cc: "guix-devel@gnu.org" <guix-devel@gnu.org>


Ben Woodcroft <b.woodcroft@uq.edu.au> writes:

>> What do you think?
> I think you are quite valiant. As I say, I cannot be confident in my=20
> testing (even those in the readme). The diff looked mostly fine by eye,=
=20
> but there was some issues near the end which mangled things somewhat

What was mangled?

> (although maybe not the result, not sure). How's the attached? I upped=20
> version too. OK?

I think this line may be problematic:

> +               (("([\"`| ])awk" _ prefix)

Is your intent really to replace =E2=80=9C awk=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9C|awk=
=E2=80=9D?  In my previous
patch I tried to more explicit by using alternatives in the group:

> +               (("(\"|`|\| )awk" _ prefix)

Was there a problem with the version above?  It does not replace =E2=80=9C=
 awk=E2=80=9D
and =E2=80=9C|awk=E2=80=9D but only =E2=80=9C| awk=E2=80=9D (in addition =
to the other two variants).

Other than that the patch does look fine.  If you confirm that this is
what you intended then I=E2=80=99ll push it as is.

Thanks!

~~ Ricardo