[Rd] Update on "Shift-Return causes segfault (PR#3293)"

[Graeme Ambler]

Hi again all,

Martyn Plummer contacted me last week asking for the RPMs I had built for 
RH8.0 and RH9.  This is just to let you guys know that those RPMs are now up 
on CRAN, signed with my GPG key (ID 62897321).  They include all 5 of the 
patches from the readline-4.3-patches directory on ftp.gnu.org, the first of 
which fixes this particular problem.  The rawhide RPMs only apply the first 
patch.  In case anyone wants a copy of these updated RPMs, here's some links:

For the RH8.0 RPMs:

http://cran.r-project.org/bin/linux/redhat/8.x/i386/readline-4.3-4.i386.rpm
http://cran.r-project.org/bin/linux/redhat/8.x/i386/readline-devel-4.3-4.i386.rpm

For the RH9 RPMs:

http://cran.r-project.org/bin/linux/redhat/9/i386/readline-4.3-6.i386.rpm
http://cran.r-project.org/bin/linux/redhat/9/i386/readline-devel-4.3-6.i386.rpm

They should be on the mirrors by now too.

Notice that the patch numbers do not conflict with the rawhide one, so if 
redhat do publish an update then it should apply cleanly on top of these.

I hope this is useful,

Graeme.

On Monday 07 July 2003 13:56, Marc Schwartz wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I wanted to post an update on this issue and let you know that RH has
> closed the bug indicating that the issue has been resolved with
> readline version 4.3-7.
>
> So far, I have not seen an updated RPM specifically for RH 8.0 or RH 9
> via the Red Hat Network. However the comments on RH's Bugzilla
> indicate that an update is available for "Rawhide" which is RH's
> test-bed platform version of the OS. I could not get on the RH FTP
> server this morning, thus I checked RPMSEEK and found the following
> for i386 platforms:
>
> A Rawhide SRPM at:
>
> http://rpmseek.com/rpm/readline-4.3-7.src.html?hl=com&cs=readline:PN:0
>
> :0:0:673600
>
> A Rawhide RPM at:
>
> http://rpmseek.com/rpm/readline-4.3-7.i386.html?hl=com&cs=readline:PN:
> 0:0:0:674020
>
> And the Rawhide Devel RPM at:
>
> http://rpmseek.com/rpm/readline-devel-4.3-7.i386.html?hl=com&cs=readli
> ne:PN:0:0:0:674021
>
>
> Note that the dates of the above RPMs are 6/25/2003, which is 3 days
> before I filed the bug report, so it would appear that RH was already
> aware of the problem in readline 4.3-5.
>
> HTH,
>
> Marc Schwartz