I'm leaning towards the twiddling of mutt/Makefile and afterwards we can debate the fine points of to flavor or not to flavor .. as it is now, flavor combinations people use regularly are not being built. That is the major impetus behind collapsing compressed and sidebar into the main mutt build.
On Thursday 26 July 2007 03:45:01 steven mestdagh wrote: > Mike Erdely [2007-07-25, 12:43:05]: > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 05:39:00PM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > > Having read steven's post, I think he has a valid point though. > > > How about rolling the two FLAVORs into 'with_patches' if it's > > > desirable to reduce the number of FLAVORs? > > > > Or go the other way. Maybe the default "FLAVOR" have the patches and > > create a "nothing_added" FLAVOR for those purists. > > this makes no sense to me, unflavored mutt should not contain all kinds of > patch sets, imho. if you need the extra stuff in mutt, install a flavored > package. if the flavors are removed and someone wants to work on updating > mutt to a future version, the first thing they have to do is make sure the > patch sets apply to the new mutt version... so it would not really be handy > for testing, either. i don't see how these flavors hurt anyone. -- Todd Fries .. [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ | \ 1.636.410.0632 (voice) | Free Daemon Consulting \ 1.405.227.9094 (voice) | http://FreeDaemonConsulting.com \ 1.866.792.3418 (FAX) | "..in support of free software solutions." \ 250797 (FWD) | \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 37E7 D3EB 74D0 8D66 A68D B866 0326 204E 3F42 004A http://todd.fries.net/pgp.txt
