Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 00:00:06 -0800 (PST) From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: misc/33906: tic program is missing from the base FreeBSD installation Message-ID: <200201160800.g0G806O17196@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR misc/33906; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru@FreeBSD.org> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: misc/33906: tic program is missing from the base FreeBSD installation Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 09:55:06 +0200 On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 08:52:32PM -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Ruslan Ermilov [mailto:ru@FreeBSD.org] > >Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:44 AM > >To: Ted Mittelstaedt > >Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org > >Subject: Re: misc/33906: tic program is missing from the base FreeBSD > >installation > > > >> > >All these do not count in favor of putting tip(1) back > >into the base system -- nothing in the base system uses > >tip(1) and terminfo stuff. > > > > Ruslan, I fail to see why cc'ing this to bug-followup will > help anything. I sent this explanation to you in order to > help you understand the problem. Terminals are less used > than they used to be and it's understandable that you wouldn't > understand the PR unless you had experience with them. You > still don't appear to understand what I'm talking about so I > don't see that it's worth spending more effort on it. > I'm sorry about CC:ing GNATS because I have procmail(1) rules that prevent spamming my inbox with duplicate (same message ID) emails, and people often reply directly and Bcc: GNATS, and I thought this was the case. As I result, I only see a private mail. > tic and tip are completely separate programs from completely > different subsystems. tip is already in FreeBSD. tic is not. > As I already stated in my other reply, that was a typo. I was referring to tic, "TermInfo Compiler", and yes, I know what this thingie is, I used it hard at the times. > As far as your statement that nothing in the base system > uses tic, that is flat out wrong. tic is used for converting > terminfo source files to termcap entries and FreeBSD's base system > uses termcap. > FreeBSD's base system doesn't have terminfo source files. :-) > The PR was opened not for my benefit, I already know all about > termcap and terminfo, it was opened because all other modern > UNIX have programs that are included in their base to convert > terminfo source to either termcap format, or the compiled terminfo. > Admins need to convert terminfo source files (which as you > observe are not used in FreeBSD) to termcap entries (which > ARE used by FreeBSD) It's a problem not to have a program in > the base FreeBSD distribution that can do this because the > majority of UNIX are System V that use terminfo and there's > a number of terminal vendors that only supply terminfo source > files. > I clearly understand that tic(1) may be required by some admins, but I certainly don't feel its place is in the base subsystem. I'd be happy to see devel/ncurses port unbroken and installing only those parts of ncurses distribution that are not included into the base system, as Alexey suggests. > >If you want, you can submit another PR to the "ports" > >category stating that the devel/ncurses port is broken, > > but it's not, so why would I do that? Do you even know > why it's marked FORBIDDEN? I don't think you do. It's > not because it's broken, ncurses builds fine. > Don't play the word games. :-) > >but I think it's a known issue, and without a suggested > >solution it would only spam the PR database. > > > This really disappoints me. First of all the PR clearly stated > that the problem was not in ports, it was in the base. Second, > your implication is that I would condone "spamming > the PR database" > > Well, go ahead Ruslan - you can search both open and closed > PR's in the database. Show the bug list here all of the PR's > that I've entered that are "spam" > Yes, submitting a PR that states that ncurses/devel port is forbidden (which you did not) without a patch that suggests a solution would be a spam. How this could disappoint you if you clearly not going to do this? :-) > I think that you've basically shot from the hip on this PR. > Everything you've said in response makes no sense at all and > doesen't address what I'm talking about. > FreeBSD's base system doesn't use terminfo -- no green light for tic(1) in the base system. Cheers, -- Ruslan Ermilov Oracle Developer/DBA, ru@sunbay.com Sunbay Software AG, ru@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer, +380.652.512.251 Simferopol, Ukraine http://www.FreeBSD.org The Power To Serve http://www.oracle.com Enabling The Information Age To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201160800.g0G806O17196>