Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:29:21 +0100
From:      =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
To:        gary.jennejohn@freenet.de
Cc:        Leonidas Tsampros <ltsampros@upnet.gr>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: old/unupdated xterm entries in termcap db
Message-ID:  <86ws0w4c8e.fsf@ds4.des.no>
In-Reply-To: <20091209122532.2c55aa22@ernst.jennejohn.org> (Gary Jennejohn's message of "Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:25:32 %2B0100")
References:  <86d42pjc1n.fsf@bifteki.lan> <20091209122532.2c55aa22@ernst.jennejohn.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gary Jennejohn <gary.jennejohn@freenet.de> writes:
> Leonidas Tsampros <ltsampros@upnet.gr> writes:
> > Why aren't these entries updated in order to match the ones that
> > ship with xterm? Am I missing something?
> Probably because xterm is under ports and termcap under src and it
> would not be easy to track changes in ports under src.
>
> The only practical way to keep termcap up to date would be for the
> committer updating the port to also check and update termcap under src.
> The problem with this is that most ports committers aren't authorized
> to make commits under src.

That's not an issue - termcaps don't change all that often.  We should
just import the new definitions.

DES
--=20
Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86ws0w4c8e.fsf>