[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: packaging pine

On Mon, 10 Dec 2001, Santiago Vila wrote:

> If you want a "pine-builder" package you are welcome to write one, but
> do not ask me for help. I think we don't need it (not to mention dpkg
> is not reentrant and such package would have to be quite tricky).
Just a rough thought without any knowledge if this could work:  What
about a package which installs pine-src and builds the binary package
in the postinst.  I'm afraid installing it in the same process would
not be possible because dpkg locks the database, but a wrapper around
pine which does the actual dpkg -i if there is a new package build on the
system before calling the pine binary could work.  But whether this stuff
would make sense??

I think mailbombing the authors of pine to change their crappy license
would be an even better idea - but I'm afraid people did so in the
past and there seem to be stubborn people at the University of Washington.

Kind regards


Reply to: