Bug 13370

Summary: elm-port upgraded, improved
Product: Ports & Packages Reporter: Mikhail T. <freebsd-2024>
Component: Individual Port(s)Assignee: Andrey A. Chernov <ache>
Status: Closed FIXED    
Severity: Affects Only Me CC: ache
Priority: Normal    
Version: Latest   
Hardware: Any   
OS: Any   
Attachments:
Description Flags
file.diff none

Description Mikhail T. 1999-08-25 07:30:00 UTC 
	The current version of the port is very old -- it is ...54. Version
	..60 was released at the end of May. The current version would not
	build on my 2.2.8 system, which does not have inttypes.h.

	This port addresses those two things, and hack elm to force it to
	use share-library. All of the elm's utilities (answer, readmsg,
	newalias, etc.) and the elm itself link with static libutil.a.
	This port makes and installs the shared version libelmutil.so*
	and makes all of the executables link with it instead. This alone
	reduced the size of the (gzipped) package, for example from 370Kb
	to 261Kb. The virtual memory usage will also be smaller at runtime,
	when, say, readmsg is invoked from inside the elm-spawned editor.
Comment 1 Will Andrews 1999-08-25 18:40:36 UTC 
On 25-Aug-99 Mikhail Teterin wrote:
> 
>>Number:         13370
>>Category:       ports
>>Synopsis:       elm-port upgraded, improved
>>Confidential:   no
>>Severity:       serious
>>Priority:       medium
>>Responsible:    freebsd-ports
>>State:          open
>>Quarter:        
>>Keywords:       
>>Date-Required:
>>Class:          change-request
>>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>>Arrival-Date:   Tue Aug 24 23:30:00 PDT 1999
>>Closed-Date:
>>Last-Modified:
>>Originator:     Mikhail Teterin
>>Release:        FreeBSD 3.2-STABLE i386
>>Organization:
> Virtual Estates, Inc.
>>Environment:
> 
>>Description:
> 
>       The current version of the port is very old -- it is ...54. Version
>       ..60 was released at the end of May. The current version would not
>       build on my 2.2.8 system, which does not have inttypes.h.

I received word that elm 2.5 was out some time ago. However, my attempts at
upgrading the mail/elm port (from 2.4ME+54 to 2.5.1) were not 100% successful.
If you would like to have a look at the work I've done, let me know.

Or, you can leave this upgrade to be committed and (try to make a
2.4ME+64->2.5 upgrade or ignore elm 2.5 altogether).

--
Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com>
Comment 2 Mikhail T. 1999-08-26 06:08:46 UTC 
Will Andrews once wrote:
>I received word that elm 2.5 was out some time ago.

Let me know  where it is! I did  not see anything newer then  +60 on the
usual ftp://ftp.ozone.fmi.fi/KEH/ ...

> However, my attempts at upgrading  the mail/elm port (from 2.4ME+54 to
> 2.5.1) were not 100%  successful. If you would like to  have a look at
> the work I've done, let me know.
>
> Or, you  can leave  this upgrade to  be committed and  (try to  make a
> 2.4ME+64->2.5 upgrade or ignore elm 2.5 altogether).

The one I submitted is definetly better then what we had. Until I take a
look at 2.5, that's all I can say :)

	-mi
Comment 3 Steve Price freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 1999-09-18 04:24:39 UTC 
Responsible Changed
From-To: freebsd-ports->ache

Over to port's maintainer.
Comment 4 Steve Price freebsd_committer freebsd_triage 1999-12-29 21:08:00 UTC 
State Changed
From-To: open->closed

A request to update to version 2.5 is already in ports/12915.  Maybe you 
can supply diffs as a followup to that problem report?  Thanks.