Re: emacs23: bugfix suitable for squeeze?
Julien Cristau <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 21:51:42 -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
>> Would this fix be appropriate for squeeze, or should I hold off?
>> The bug's probably not "important" since the circumstances involved are
>> likely to be rare, but the consequences are fairly severe.
> Looks ok at first glance, though I don't know what the various macros it
> uses do.
OK, I have this fix prepared, but not uploaded yet.
Could you give me an opinion about this one?
I'm tempted to consider including the fix since it's causing people
trouble, and upstream, our gnus package, and Romain's snapshot package
all behave differently. The fix would mean dropping this patch and
reverting to the upstream behavior:
@@ -825,9 +825,14 @@
-(defcustom message-sendmail-f-is-evil nil
- "*Non-nil means don't add \"-f username\" to the sendmail command line.
-Doing so would be even more evil than leaving it out."
+;; message-sendmail-f-is-evil is nil here in the upstream source, but
+;; sendmail works right under Debian Linux, so we want t. [was
+;; orignally reported for emacs 19 as debian#7051]
+(defcustom message-sendmail-f-is-evil t
+ "*Non-nil means don't add \"-f username\" to the sendmail command
+line, because adding it would be more evil than leaving it out. Under
+Debian/GNU/Linux, sendmail works right, so it should be safe for this
+to be set to true."
:link '(custom-manual "(message)Mail Variables")
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4