From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Sep 16 11:47:40 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA08727 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 16 Sep 1998 11:47:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ady.warpnet.ro (ady.warpnet.ro [193.230.201.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA08688 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 1998 11:47:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ady@warpnet.ro) Received: from localhost (ady@localhost) by ady.warpnet.ro (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA09855; Wed, 16 Sep 1998 21:44:06 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from ady@warpnet.ro) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 21:44:06 +0300 (EEST) From: Adrian Penisoara To: Studded cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/7938: Pine Port Upgrade: from 4.02A to 4.03 In-Reply-To: <35FFFF88.3D06143D@dal.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org 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