Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2000 15:55:28 -0800 (PST) From: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: pkg/SECURITY Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0003261552050.5971-100000@freefall.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20000326150524.A87545@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 26 Mar 2000, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Mar 25, 2000 at 05:43:54PM -0800, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > I've written patches which teach bsd.port.mk and pkg_foo about a > > pkg/SECURITY (and +SECURITY) file which gets cat'ed to the user before > > pre-fetch, after post-install, and at pkg_add time. > > How is that different than having a pkg/MESSAGE file and explicitly > cat'ing it in pre-fetch, and post-install? Because pkg/MESSAGE might already exist, and it's for a separate purpose. MESSAGE is often used for things like post-install configuration options that must be done before the port can be used, which isn't appropriate to display before compilation. My pkg/SECURITY change also prints it bracketed by a ****** SECURITY WARNING ****** line and adds a "Press ^C if this is not acceptable" when displaying in pre-fetch. I think it's cleaner to have it separate to MESSAGES. Kris To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0003261552050.5971-100000>