On Thursday 24 August 2006 15:33, mwoehlke wrote: > Matthew Burgess wrote: > > We could just as easily patch procps to prevent it from installing its > > versions of those two programs, but as we're preventing installation of > > `su' as it is, it made sense to suppress coreutils kill and uptime in > > the same patch. > > I'd like to jump in and make a comment here... I have coreutils (5.97) > built on nine different platforms, but haven't even attempted to tackle > procps as it is not auto*-based (and so far I have not been motivated to > track down how to set up the build correctly, much less chase down bugs > and build errors). Unless procps is fixed/improved, dropping these from > coreutils means - from my POV - that they will be gone entirely.
the procps maintainer will never accept autotools (his words, not mine) ... i sent him a patch to autotool the build system and it was rejected ;) -mike
pgp61OVUdCvU8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
