From owner-freebsd-current Thu Jul 22 15: 0: 8 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk (nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk [193.237.89.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3421565D for ; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 14:59:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk) Received: (from nik@localhost) by nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.2) id VAA35747; Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:48:27 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from nik) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 21:48:27 +0100 From: Nik Clayton To: John Polstra Cc: nik@nothing-going-on.demon.co.uk, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Moving ipf(1) to ipf(8)? Message-ID: <19990722214827.A35411@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> References: <19990719224454.A52115@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> <19990720211427.A4523@catkin.nothing-going-on.org> <199907202358.QAA70000@vashon.polstra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <199907202358.QAA70000@vashon.polstra.com>; from John Polstra on Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 04:58:49PM -0700 Organization: Nik at home, where there's nothing going on Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 04:58:49PM -0700, John Polstra wrote: > In article <19990720211427.A4523@catkin.nothing-going-on.org>, > Nik Clayton wrote: > > Assuming I did this, what's the approved method? > > > > Myself, I'd just > > > > # mv ipf.1 ipf.8 > > # cvs remove ipf.1 > > # cvs add ipf.8 > > # cvs commit -m "Renamed ipf.1 to ipf.8" ipf.1 ipf.8 > > [... check for any other man pages that refer to ipf(1) and update > > them accordingly ...] > > > > which properly reflects that (until the change) ipf.8 didn't exist. I > > *would not* use a repository copy for this. > > When in doubt, ask the repo-man. :-) > > There's enough history in the file that _if_ it were going to be > renamed, a repository copy should be used. (I don't like them either, > but they're What We Do.) I'm curious -- why are they what we do? When I've used CVS on other projects, it always made more sense to 'cvs remove' and 'cvs add'. That way, if you checked out files by date stamp, and chose a date prior to the renaming, the files you got back accurately reflected the state of the repository at that time. If you repo copy then the file will always have existed with the new name, even when other files (such as Makefiles) would refer to the old name. No? > However, you shouldn't rename the file, because it is in the contrib > tree. The whole point of contrib is that it must stay as nearly > identical to the author's distributions as possible, so that imports > of new versions aren't painful. Duly noted. > I think you should lobby the author to rename > the file in his own tree. Then the problem goes away when the next > release is imported. Will do. > Meanwhile, if you want to install it into man8, you could do it with > special rules in "src/sbin/ipf/Makefile". Something like this > (untested) should do the trick: > > MAN8= ipf.8 > CLEANFILES+= ipf.8 > > ipf.8: ipf.1 > cp ${.ALLSRC} ${.TARGET} > > and delete the MAN1 line for ipf.1. I'll experiment with that (current task: get new laptop working with Coda. . .) N -- [intentional self-reference] can be easily accommodated using a blessed, non-self-referential dummy head-node whose own object destructor severs the links. -- Tom Christiansen in <375143b5@cs.colorado.edu> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message