From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 15 03:40:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30D7216A4D0 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D68E43D53 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBF3ePuc014720 for ; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:25 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iBF3ePkM014719; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:25 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:25 GMT Message-Id: <200412150340.iBF3ePkM014719@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Gavin Mu Subject: Re: ports/75052: [MAINTAINER UPDATE] chinese/qterm: update to 0.4.0pre2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Gavin Mu List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 03:40:26 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/75052; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Gavin Mu To: Clive Lin Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/75052: [MAINTAINER UPDATE] chinese/qterm: update to 0.4.0pre2 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:34:13 +0800 It means those files in ~/.qterm directory, eg. address.cfg and qterm.cfg not the ~/.qterm directory. ~/.qterm directory privilege has no problem, but address.cfg and qterm.cfg are 0444 default, and you would be prevent from modifying the SITE description and OPTIONS. Clive Lin Wrote: >On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 07:47:59PM +0800, Gavin Mu wrote: > > >>+QTerm's config file privilege in your ~/.qterm directory to 0644 at least >> >> > >Shouldn't this be 0755 ? > >Other part looks good. > > >