Towards a BLFS 6.4 release

Ken Moffat ken at
Sat Dec 27 14:29:05 PST 2008

On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 09:36:37PM +0000, William Immendorf wrote:
> I would like to see these packages in BLFS:
> Texlive: Since tetex is obslete, and the mantainer moved on to this,
> this would be a great tetex replacement.
 I have no opinion on this one.

> Alpine: A fork of pine, more recent, and without that ofending clash
> in the licence.

 I gave up pine for mutt a long time ago, although I might have
moved to alpine if it had been around then.  Certainly, the pine
licence is not something I like.

 From memory, editors mostly use mutt or a graphical client
(actually, looking at this particular mailbox, most editors don't
admit to their user agent).  So, probably the best way forward on
this is to build and test it, update the ticket when it is confirmed
to work , and either attach a patch or just comment on any changed
dependencies or configuration, plus the time and size information /
interesting configure switches, anything necessary to build docs or
to install them in a versioned directory.

 From my point of view, the _big_ problem with updating a package I
don't use is that I can see obvious changes, but unless someone can
say it works reliably when built using the instructions it might
just be a problem waiting to catch someone several months down the
line.  Otherwise, I would have moved on with sqlite3 sooner, and
updated thunderbird as part of that.

das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list