Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 10:11:28 -0700 From: Studded <Studded@dal.net> To: Adrian Penisoara <ady@warpnet.ro> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, pine@freebsd.ady.ro Subject: Re: Pine 4 update Message-ID: <35F80840.4F1302A@dal.net> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980910174501.29789E-100000@ady.warpnet.ro>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm combining your response to the PR and this one since I don't think
we need the whole discussion in the audit trail. I hope you realize that
I mean no offense with this port, and other than the fact that
pine/osdep/os-bsf.h NEEDS to be patched to look at
/usr/local/etc/pine.conf and is not currently, I don't care if you use
any of it or not. I needed to upgrade, so I did, and shared my work. :)
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 1998 Studded@dal.net wrote:
>
> >
> > There are other changes here as well. Most notably all references in the
> > program and documentation to /usr/local[/lib]/pine.conf and
> > /usr/local/lib/mime.types are changed to /usr/local/etc. Also, I've added a
> > sample installation of /usr/local/etc/pine.conf to the makefile. Some of the
>
> IMO I believe auto-generated /usr/local/etc/pine.conf isn't needed --
> please tell me if I'm wrong...
It's not *needed*, however it does provide an example to the user and
saves a step for them down the road. I believe the way I've set it up
combines convenience for the user with caution in not overwriting an
existing file. The last time I suggested doing this on this list it got
a positive reaction. It's up to you if you include it or not.
> > patches are regenerated due to the changes I've made, the other patches I've left
> > alone except for the ones (like patch-aa) which did not apply cleanly.
> >patch-as
> > and patch-aq need to be split because they affect more than one file, but I
>
> * "patch-as" holds patches for initial setup of F_TCAP_WINS &
> F_QUELL_INTERNAL_MSG variables in the config file.
> * "patch-aq" holds patches to (optionally) deactivate speller
> functionality in Pico (because we don't have any compatible
> spellcheckers for now)
Yes, I figured out what most of them do, but thanks. :)
> > didn't want to deal with that in case there was a reason for it. The
> >new changes
> > for pine/init.c that were in patch-as I moved to patch-az. I don't understand
> > what a lot of the existing patches do, so I left them alone. :)
>
> Please try to understand them and not move them all around without a
> good reason -- or else the CVS maintainers are going to have a lot of
> headaches... :)
Actually the point I was trying to make was that I did not move things
around, except for the new patch that I created. At the same time, the
ports policy as I understand it is to have each patch affect only one
file, therefore they should be split up at some point.
> > +PLIST_SUB= PKGNAME=${PKGNAME}
>
> What's this for ? ISTR there was some chatting over these new
> variables...
This is discussed in the handbook. I added this so that I could put
etc/pine.conf.%%PKGNAME%% in the PLIST so that the example copy could be
deleted as part of the package while leaving the actual pine.conf file
in place. As I understand it, leaving a configuration file in place is
typical ports policy so that local changes aren't lost when/if the port
is reinstalled.
> > +
> > do-build:
> > @(cd ${WRKSRC}; ${SETENV} ${MAKE_ENV} ./build bsf)
> >
> > do-install:
> > ${INSTALL} ${COPY} -o ${LIBOWN} -g ${LIBGRP} -m ${LIBMODE} \
> > - ${WRKSRC}/bin/libpico.so.2.0 ${PREFIX}/lib/libpico.so.2.0
> > + ${WRKSRC}/pico/libpico.a ${PREFIX}/lib/libpico.a
>
> Bogus, bogus, don't do that ! This is a temporary library that is to be
> statically linked into the resulting executables...
I was following your example. :) If that library doesn't need to be
installed, that's fine with me, however the libpico.so.* that you had in
the makefile and patches isn't in the sources for this version.
> > + ${PREFIX}/bin/pine -conf > ${WRKSRC}/pine.conf
> > + ${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/pine.conf ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf.${PKGNAME}
> > +.if !exists(/usr/local/etc/pine.conf)
> > + ${CP} ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf.${PKGNAME} ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf
> > +.else
> > + @${ECHO} ''
> > + @${ECHO} "A ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf file exists from a previous installation."
> > + @${ECHO} "You should compare it with ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf.${PKGNAME} to see"
> > + @${ECHO} "if there are any important changes in the new version."
> > + @${ECHO} ''
> > +.endif
>
> Please tell me why do we need a ${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf ?
As I mentioned above, it gives the user a file to configure in its
proper location and saves them a step.
> Please don't commit right now these patches, unless the BUGTRAQ bug that
> was announced is really a boomer. I know I sound a bit harsh but I'd
> really like to have proper commits for this port, it's pretty important
> and mistakes should be avoided...
I agree that it's important, and I don't mind if you wait on it.
However I hope you will take note of the problems that I corrected.
Adrian Penisoara wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 10 Sep 1998, Studded wrote:
>
> > I've submitted a patch to update pine4 to 4.03, and add some
> > additional functionality. It's PR 7879. I was in a hurry for this due to
> > the discussion on bugtraq regarding the possibility of a user with a
> > "pine only" login account gaining shell access. Also I've had "add an
>
> Links, please, links... I'd like to know about it...
You should be on the bugtraq mailing list. You can search the archives
at http://www.geek-girl.com/bugtraq/search.html.
> > install of /usr/local/etc/pine.conf" on my list of things to do forever,
> > so I'm happy. :)
>
> It's there in the port since Pine 4.02A... :)
I'm confused by this comment, since you say several times that you
don't think it's needed, but you say here that it is already included.
> > One problem I ran into was when I added a test for the pine.conf
> > file. Originally I tried:
> >
> > .if !exists(${PREFIX}/etc/pine.conf)
> >
> > but that didn't work, so I had to switch to
> >
> > .if !exists(/usr/local/etc/pine.conf)
>
> IMHO we shouldn't auto-generate /usr/local/etc/pine.conf because, well,
> it doesn't do anything and it will upset future versions of Pine that will
> be installed -- please tell me if I'm wrong...
Please look carefully at the system I used. Not only do I not overwrite
an existing pine.conf file, but I warn the user that they should review
the new file if an old one exists. Pine conf files are designed
especially so that old files are compatible with newer versions of pine,
so the chances of it creating a conflict are almost zero.
> BTW, I believe there is a pretty big problem with the version of your
> port -- libpico.a isn't supposed to be installed anywhere outside the
> port's working directory, this library is statically linked into the
> resulting executables...
As I said above, I was following your example. My cursory examination
of it just now though seems to indicate that you are correct, the
library does not need to be installed.
Even if you don't use the other changes, please do incorporate the
patches to change the documentation so that it correctly refers to
/usr/local/etc, the patches that allow you to place the mime.types file
in /usr/local/etc, and most importantly, the patch to change the pine
os-bsf.h file so that it actually looks in /usr/local/etc for pine.conf.
Good luck,
Doug
--
*** Chief Operations Officer, DALnet IRC network ***
At Barry (a small town in south Wales) hidden cameras have had to be
installed to keep watch on the town's CCTV [Closed Circuit Television]
to record acts of vandalism against the CCTV. - Privacy Forum
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?35F80840.4F1302A>