* Chris Halls <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-05-14 11:26]: > Sorry, typo on my part - I meant Mail-Followup-To :) and now my mutt gets > the To/Cc right by itself, thanks.
Well, not needed anymore, I'm now subscribed *gg*
>> Uhm, don't think that that would be a good idea. Could lead to security
>> problems or such. Moving it away could be an option, using mktemp.
>
> What problems are you thinking of? Why is moving it away better? I'm
> worried that moving it away breaks other s/w that could be using it during
> the install.
Then copy it away and move it back or such. How would you like to make
it read-only so that the install isn't able to bypass/break through it?
#v+
if [ -e ${HOME}/.mailcap ]; then
TMPFILE=`mktemp /tmp/mailcap.XXXXXX`
cp ${HOME}/.mailcap $TMPFILE
chmod --reference=${HOME}/.mailcap $TMPFILE
# do the install here
mv -f $TMPFILE ${HOME}/.mailcap
else
# do the install here
rm ${HOME}/.mailcap
fi
#v-
That should be all the magic needed. I now grepped through the source
and found that in
build-tree/oo_1.0_src/setup2/source/custom/regmimetypes/regmimetypes.cxx
line 93 .mailcap defines FILE_NAME_MAILCAP. Need to investigate
further to find if the function that changes that FILE_NAME_MAILCAP can
easily be disabled. Stay doomed.
> Well... yes, more or less. I'm talking short-term here: we'll support this
> extra stuff later on, but for now I'm trying to minimise the ways in which
> it can be broken in subtle ways. If a user does this sort of thing, I'd
> rather it breaks loudly and everyone knows that's what they did and they are
> on their own.
Well, the patch for that thing was submitted already to the list, Jan
quoted it recently.
> Actually, that 'configuration file' isn't actually marked as a conffile in
> your .debs - I discovered that yesterday ;)
Ah, didn't check for that. Might have stumbled upon it sooner or later
but it mustn't be me who finds all the details ,)
> Yep, but if a user fiddles there they're starting to do 'more advanced'
> stuff anyway and will hopefully report that if they want something fixed.
... like me you mean? :)
> I'm just trying to keep this setup stuff really simple until it's fixed in a
> better way. Parsing .sversionrc and fixing nothing else adds more potential
> for stuff to break in subtle ways, so I'd rather not until it's done well.
No problem at all. I was just pointing out what I stumbled upon -- I
didn't say that it must or should be addressed immediately. Write it
somewhere down, deep burried in some todo lists, I don't care. I just
like to have it addressed and noted at least.
Sorry if you got me wrong. I don't want to distract you all from more
valueable stuff. I know that there are many things to address. It's
just that it happens to come to my attention now and I rather like to
mention it right away than forget it. Nothing more and nothing less.
> That was probably the Gnome file copy error. You can track the issues I've
> filed by querying for my user, which is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ah yes, right.
Have fun,
Alfie
--
Debian trennt strikt zwischen stable, unstable und testing releases, so daß
Du entscheiden kannst, ob Du auf den Gegner, Deinen Fuß oder beide Füße
gleichzeitig schießen willst.
-- Robin S. Socha in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
pgpyoICIRGjty.pgp
Description: PGP signature
