Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-03-14 Thread Stuart Henderson
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

Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-03-14 Thread Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
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

Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-01-10 Thread Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
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

Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-01-10 Thread Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
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

Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-01-10 Thread Stuart Henderson
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-

Re: (almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2013-01-10 Thread Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
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

(almost) [NEW] shells/dash

2012-12-30 Thread Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-27 Thread Stuart Henderson
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread Mike Korbakov
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread 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 >> - use SEPARATE_BUILD >> - fix license comment (it's BSD, the GPL pa

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread Mike Korbakov
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread Matthias Kilian
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 -

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread 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 utility conforms to IEEE Std 1003.1-2001 (``POSIX.1'').

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread Mike Korbakov
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread 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 to DESCR ok to import? dash.tgz Description: application/tar-gz

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-26 Thread Pascal Stumpf
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-25 Thread Mike Korbakov
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

Re: [NEW] shells/dash (correction)

2011-06-25 Thread Mike Korbakov
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 >

Re: [NEW] shells/dash

2011-06-25 Thread 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 > part most > of all UNIX'es now in a separate package (textutils) and has different names?

Re: [NEW] shells/dash

2011-06-25 Thread Stuart Henderson
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?

Re: [NEW] shells/dash

2011-06-25 Thread Marc Espie
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.

Re: [NEW] shells/dash

2011-06-25 Thread Pascal Stumpf
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

[NEW] shells/dash

2011-06-25 Thread Mike Korbakov
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