From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 9 11:32:49 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90507106566B for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:32:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) Received: from mout5.freenet.de (mout5.freenet.de [IPv6:2001:748:100:40::2:7]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BA8B8FC15 for ; Wed, 9 Dec 2009 11:32:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [195.4.92.17] (helo=7.mx.freenet.de) by mout5.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.70 #1) id 1NIKml-0007Rl-VW; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:32:47 +0100 Received: from p57ae1d0a.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([87.174.29.10]:28283 helo=ernst.jennejohn.org) by 7.mx.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gary.jennejohn@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.69 #94) id 1NIKml-0003UF-NW; Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:32:47 +0100 Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 12:32:46 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn To: Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= Message-ID: <20091209123246.22b9ecc3@ernst.jennejohn.org> In-Reply-To: <86ws0w4c8e.fsf@ds4.des.no> References: <86d42pjc1n.fsf@bifteki.lan> <20091209122532.2c55aa22@ernst.jennejohn.org> <86ws0w4c8e.fsf@ds4.des.no> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.3 (GTK+ 2.16.2; amd64-portbld-freebsd9.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Leonidas Tsampros , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: old/unupdated xterm entries in termcap db X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: gary.jennejohn@freenet.de List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:32:49 -0000 On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 12:29:21 +0100 Dag-Erling Sm__rgrav wrote: > Gary Jennejohn writes: > > Leonidas Tsampros 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. > That's a practical attitude, but it begs the question why it hasn't happened in the past. --- Gary Jennejohn