On 2013/03/14 16:59, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> Hi (again),
>
> I'm still interested in supporting this one, here's a new tiny tarball
> with amended PERMIT_* and MAINTAINER.
>
One minor issue, pkg/DESCR still lists the removed libedit flavour.
Fixed in my tree, can I have an OK from some
Hi (again),
I'm still interested in supporting this one, here's a new tiny tarball
with amended PERMIT_* and MAINTAINER.
dash.tgz
Description: Binary data
jca+o...@wxcvbn.org (Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas) writes:
> One could argue that it makes the static binary twice as large.
> If that isn't a problem I'll just enable libedit by default and get rid
> of the flavor. This would make it easier to know whether all flavors
> should be linked to the build
Stuart Henderson writes:
[...]
> Any particular reason for the separate flavour for libedit?
> libedit is in base anyway, so it seems more sensible to just
> enable it by default.
I had none, except that I thought it has not been much tested (most
distros ship dash without it, afaik).
$ ls -lh
On 2013/01/10 11:55, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote:
> jca+o...@wxcvbn.org (Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas) writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > here's a new port for dash 0.5.7, the Debian Almquist SHell.
> > I only took a look at marc.info just before writing this mail, and found
> > http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-
jca+o...@wxcvbn.org (Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas) writes:
> Hi,
>
> here's a new port for dash 0.5.7, the Debian Almquist SHell.
> I only took a look at marc.info just before writing this mail, and found
> http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=130908586003713&w=2 from Mike
> Korbakov and Stuart Henders
Hi,
here's a new port for dash 0.5.7, the Debian Almquist SHell.
I only took a look at marc.info just before writing this mail, and found
http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=130908586003713&w=2 from Mike
Korbakov and Stuart Henderson. I re-used the comment, descr and licence
bits since they were
On 2011-06-26, Mike Korbakov wrote:
>>> ?I did not see dependency on groff, how to find this in future ?
>>
>> see http://www.openbsd.org/faq/ports/specialtopics.html#Mandoc
>> and bsd.port.mk(5)
>>
>>> ?What happens if use nroff ?
>>
>> on OpenBSD /usr/local/bin/nroff is a wrapper for groff
>
> o
27.06.2011, 01:16, "Stuart Henderson" :
> On 2011-06-26, Mike Korbakov ; wrote:
>
>> I agree with all changes, building this version on i386 -current was
>> successful.
>>
>> 26.06.2011, 14:54, "Stuart Henderson" ;:
>>> updated version;
>>>
>>> - fix the manpage
>>> - list WANTLIB
>>> - us
On 2011-06-26, Mike Korbakov wrote:
> I agree with all changes, building this version on i386 -current was
> successful.
>
> 26.06.2011, 14:54, "Stuart Henderson" :
>> updated version;
>>
>> - fix the manpage
>> - list WANTLIB
>> - use SEPARATE_BUILD
>> - fix license comment (it's BSD, the GPL pa
26.06.2011, 23:03, "Eric Furman" :
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 05:29 +0400, "Mike Korbakov" ;
> wrote:
>
>> sorry first link must be
>> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nl&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=FreeBSD+8.2-RELEASE&format=html
>> in which we can see:
>>
>> STANDARDS
>> The nl utili
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 03:03:13PM -0400, Eric Furman wrote:
> > STANDARDS
> > The nl utility conforms to IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (``POSIX.1'').
> >
> > HISTORY
> > The nl utility first appeared in AT&T System V Release 2 UNIX.
>
> I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure nl predates cat -
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 05:29 +0400, "Mike Korbakov"
wrote:
> sorry first link must be
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nl&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=FreeBSD+8.2-RELEASE&format=html
> in which we can see:
>
> STANDARDS
> The nl utility conforms to IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (``POSIX.1'').
I agree with all changes, building this version on i386 -current was successful.
26.06.2011, 14:54, "Stuart Henderson" :
> updated version;
>
> - fix the manpage
> - list WANTLIB
> - use SEPARATE_BUILD
> - fix license comment (it's BSD, the GPL part is only a build tool)
> - add a little more info
updated version;
- fix the manpage
- list WANTLIB
- use SEPARATE_BUILD
- fix license comment (it's BSD, the GPL part is only a build tool)
- add a little more info to DESCR
ok to import?
dash.tgz
Description: application/tar-gz
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 05:23:18AM +0400, Mike Korbakov wrote:
> I didn't mean GNU tools. May be, not most of all old UNIX'es, but most modern
> systems has textools.
> Read bottom of page:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nl&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=FreeBSD+Ports+8.2-RELEASE&format=h
sorry first link must be
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=nl&apropos=0&sektion=1&manpath=FreeBSD+8.2-RELEASE&format=html
in which we can see:
STANDARDS
The nl utility conforms to IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (``POSIX.1'').
HISTORY
The nl utility first appeared in AT&T System V Release
I have tried to consider all comments
26.06.2011, 02:22, "Stuart Henderson" :
> On 2011-06-25, Mike Korbakov ; wrote:
>
>> Here is dash port.
>>
>> I'm surprised that needs the great patch (which adds one letter).
>> What do you think, is correct that text utilities, which have always been a
>
On 2011-06-25, Mike Korbakov wrote:
> Here is dash port.
>
> I'm surprised that needs the great patch (which adds one letter).
> What do you think, is correct that text utilities, which have always been a
> part most
> of all UNIX'es now in a separate package (textutils) and has different names?
On 2011-06-25, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 07:21:19PM +0400, Mike Korbakov wrote:
>> COMMENT= Debian Almquist shell, POSIX-compliant, faster than bash
>
> Comment's a bit too long, especially considering that *every* shell is
> faster than bash.
You haven't tried zsh?
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 07:21:19PM +0400, Mike Korbakov wrote:
> COMMENT= Debian Almquist shell, POSIX-compliant, faster than bash
Comment's a bit too long, especially considering that *every* shell is
faster than bash.
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 07:21:19PM +0400, Mike Korbakov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Here is dash port.
>
> I'm surprised that needs the great patch (which adds one letter).
> What do you think, is correct that text utilities, which have always been a
> part most
> of all UNIX'es now in a separate packag
Hello!
Here is dash port.
I'm surprised that needs the great patch (which adds one letter).
What do you think, is correct that text utilities, which have always been a
part most
of all UNIX'es now in a separate package (textutils) and has different names?
$OpenBSD$
$Id: patch-src_mkbuiltins,v 1
23 matches
Mail list logo