[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Lynx-dev] file://localhost/usr/share/doc/packages/lynx/lynx_help/ly
Re: [Lynx-dev] file://localhost/usr/share/doc/packages/lynx/lynx_help/lynx-dev.html
Sun, 27 Nov 2011 12:39:52 -0500
On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 06:22:02PM +0100, Krzysztof Å»elechowski wrote:
> UÅ¼ytkownik Thomas Dickey napisaÅ:
> >On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 01:40:38AM +0100, Krzysztof ??elechowski wrote:
> >>U??ytkownik Thomas Dickey napisa??:
> >>>However, you may be specifically referring to the part of the url that
> >>>has the version number (because that corresponds to a directory name).
> >>>I suppose if you're attempting to review old configuration details, it
> >>>can be a nuisance trying to use the "release" url. I added a symbolic
> >>>link to smooth that out.
> >>Actually, a "Moved permanently" redirect would be more appropriate, but
> >>otherwise works as prescribed, thanks a lot.
> >>>The issue with ".bz2" also depends on whether support for
> >>>bzip2 is compiled in, or configured with an external program - or
> >>>For instance, it works "here".
> >>>2.8.6 is the previous release (October 2006).
> >>>><URL: http://lynx.isc.org/release/lynx2-8-6/lynx_help/cattoc.html>
> >>>2.8.7 is current (July 2009).
> >>>This url works:
> >>> <URL: http://lynx.isc.org/release/lynx2-8-7/lynx_help/cattoc.html>
> >>But the problem is, the URL with 8-6 is installed in the local
> >>documentation for v2.8.7. The documentation on line has a relative URL
> >>there so it does not matter.
> >That was in the initial tarball, but I see that I fixed it later
> >(in the rel.2 patch). Patches are in
> > http://lynx.isc.org/release/patches/
> >The current tarballs in
> > http://lynx.isc.org/release
> >have the rel.2 patch. Did I overlook something on lynx.isc.org, or are
> >you using the initial tarball?
> You tell me. The tarball name is the same and the build service does
> not offer MD5. I cannot open a bug saying "Hey you have got the wrong
The "CHANGES" file inside the tarball would tell (since the update to it
is part of the patch). I've gotten very little feedback from packagers(*)
regarding the post-release patches and updates; each release starting with
2.8.2 in 1999 has had post-release patches. _All_ of the interaction I
recall regarding those patches has been my pointing out that they exist.
The individual tarballs (including release updates) are of course on
> tarball" because I have no way to prove it. Since a workaround has been
> implemented on server and a fix has been (sneakily) deployed upstream, I
> do not think the problem is worth fixing.
> >Executing(%prep): /bin/sh -e /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.xiV4ai
this narrows it down slightly (since you're referring to rpms).
(*) roughly speaking, less than a quarter of the packagers for the various
programs that I maintain communicate directly with me.
Thomas E. Dickey
Description: PGP signature