Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 21:44:06 +0300 (EEST) From: Adrian Penisoara <ady@warpnet.ro> To: Studded <Studded@dal.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/7938: Pine Port Upgrade: from 4.02A to 4.03 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980916212048.9490A-100000@ady.warpnet.ro> In-Reply-To: <35FFFF88.3D06143D@dal.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
On Wed, 16 Sep 1998, Studded wrote:
> Adrian Penisoara wrote:
>
> > > you missed. Please add
> > > ${WRKSRC}/build
> > > ${WRKSRC}/doc/mime.types
> > > ${WRKSRC}/pine/init.c
> > >
> > > to your list of files for the second sed command.
> >
> > In no case in the second but in the first:
>
> I'm not sure what this means.
The first for/${SED} loop and not the second.
Sorry for my (very) poor english...
>
> > these are source/executable
> > files -- if the sed command replaces the string in an incorrect place then
> > bad things may happen; OTOH in the case of documentation files there isn't
> > too much to worry about.
>
> I agree that this can be a problem, however I checked things very
> thoroughly before I suggested doing this. That's why I submitted
> individual patches the first time.
Even more clear: I found some places in pine/osdep/os-bsf.h where we
should leave "/usr/local/" untouched (some NN/INN/Inews paths)...
> > And BTW, this raises another ideea: I can't find any mailcap/mime.types
> > files in /etc, /usr/share or any other place. I think we should have them
> > placed somewhere (initially I was thinking about /usr/local/etc but now
> > that I checked out /usr/share/misc I believe /usr/local/share/misc is more
> > apropiate -- meaning, of course, ${PREFIX}/share/misc). What do you think?
> > And about that, I think FreeBSD should come with its own general
> > mailcap/mime.types files -- these files are pretty much OS dependant,
> > don't you think ? And there are many programs that might use them besides
> > Pine (Netscape's Navigator/Communicator, Lynx, etc.)...
>
> I don't know that much about mime actually, so I can't help you there.
> The /share/ directory is for architecture-independent stuff, so I think
> /usr/local/etc/ would be better personally. I have a strong feeling that
> anything that is user frobabble should be installed by the port in
> /usr/local/etc, but not everyone shares my view.
The fact that termcap was placed in /usr/share/misc and not /etc (in fact
/etc/termcap is a symlink back to /usr/share/misc/termcap) made me believe
this is the right place -- termcap is pretty much similar in functions to
mailcap and mime.types, don't you think ?
As you said, hier(7) says share/ is for "architecture-independent ascii
text file" -- don't we fit the exact case ? :-)
As for "user frobabble" I'd say ~/.mime.types and ~/.mailcap are the
files the user should modify if they'll ever need to...
> > > Also, in the sources there are two files that refer to
> > > /usr/local/pine.conf, pine4.03/doc/tech-notes/background.html and
> > > pine4.03/doc/tech-notes.txt. Personally I consider this a "bug" in the
> > > source. If you are in contact with the developers you might want to
> > > mention this.
> >
> > Unfortunately I'm not in contact with any of them (I only remember to
> > have talked once to Mark Crispin about the "imap-uw"'s evolution)...
> > I'd be glad to suggest the patches on the pine-info list.
>
> Works for me, thanks. :)
I understand you'll leave me the great honours (I'll give you credit,
don't worry :) ?
> > > Finally, this part of the post-install target
> > >
> > > ${PREFIX}/bin/pine -P ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf -conf
> > > >${WRKSRC}/pine.conf
> > > ${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/pine.conf ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf
> > >
> > > indicates to me that you are trying to draw in the existing
> > > /usr/local/etc/pine.conf file and combine that with the new conf file. My
> > > testing indicates that this is not the case, and will result in
> > > overwriting the user's pine.conf file. I still think that my solution to
> > > this problem is better, but I'm biased. :)
> >
> > OK, it does look a bit weird but all I wanted to do is to upgrade the
> > system wide ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf file (or install a fresh file if there
> > isn't one already). This should be the replica of what Pine is going to do
> > with the user's ~/.pinerc file on the first run :-) ...
> > Do you see any problems with this ?
>
> Sorry if I wasn't clear. I understand your intentions, but what you're
> trying to do here won't work, it overwrites the system file with a blank
> one. This is why I suggested installing the new one side-by-side with
Strange -- this is the exact case I was trying to exclude. Doesn't the
new file contain the settings/options found in the old one ?!?
> the installed one of it already exists so the user could get a look at
> the changes, etc. with diff.
Well, judging from what happens with ~/.pinerc I'd say the "upgrade"
process of the old file through "pine -conf"should complete without
problems.
Doing the upgrade process by hand seems a bit awfull, especially when
there are many changes/options in the old file while it could easily be
done automatically...
>
> Doug
>
Thanks,
Ady (@freebsd.ady.ro)
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.3.96.980916212048.9490A-100000>