Re: uscan download from sourceforge doesn't download what you expect!

2016-10-15 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote: > Yes, this is known to me, but I did not report. The redirector / > sourceforge make it hard to distinct identically named files in > different subfolders unfortunately. This was a bug in the redirector, I've added additional links cont

Re: uscan download from sourceforge doesn't download what you expect!

2016-10-15 Thread Paul Wise
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 1:47 AM, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Who can I contact to get https://qa.debian.org/watch/sf.php/boost/ fixed? These days the reflector is just a proxy for the sourceforge RSS feeds: https://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/rss?limit=1000 So check if the issu

Re: uscan download from sourceforge doesn't download what you expect!

2016-10-15 Thread Mattia Rizzolo
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:47:21PM -0500, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > Notice the crucial difference: the reflector is using > "boost/snapshots/master" > whereas the correct URL uses "boost/1.62.0". The snapshots are pulled from > the branch tip and are NOT actual releases. So the reflector is l

Re: uscan download from sourceforge doesn't download what you expect!

2016-10-15 Thread Dimitri John Ledkov
On 15 October 2016 at 18:47, Steve M. Robbins wrote: > ... at least not for boost. > > I downloaded the latest release manually by following the links from boost.org > to https://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/files/boost/1.62.0/ > boost_1_62_0.tar.bz2/download > Yes, this is known to me, but I d

uscan download from sourceforge doesn't download what you expect!

2016-10-15 Thread Steve M. Robbins
... at least not for boost. I downloaded the latest release manually by following the links from boost.org to https://sourceforge.net/projects/boost/files/boost/1.62.0/ boost_1_62_0.tar.bz2/download Then I remembered that Dimitri had written a watch file to use the Files- Excluded facility. So