Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-10-01 Thread Joe Rhett
However it does seem that when explicit paths are called for certain componants they should be placed in line before the assumed system paths. I agree 100% that the paths should be honored. However, since it works for most people, and testing is pretty annoying (as ken stated), I'm not

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-10-01 Thread Joe Rhett
The next time somebody is frustrated by the software and wants to rant about how much of their time the developers wasted, take a step back and remember how much time and money they actually _saved_ you. Having been the guilty party which kicked off this thread, I want to step back and

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-10-01 Thread Joe Rhett
First off, why did you feel the need to send this directly to me? Cyrus is not _my_ software, I'm just a contributor. Secondly, I can understand your frustration, but your shitty attitude ain't gonna help. Sorry, I misunderstood clearly, as I thought you were heading up the imapd 2.2

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-29 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Carson Gaspar wrote: --On Friday, September 27, 2002 10:34 AM -0400 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A lot of bitching, and no proposed fixes. It works for me, and I'm sure I have submitted patches in the past to fix this dain-bramaged configure behaviour.

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-29 Thread Ken Murchison
Quoting Rob Siemborski [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Sun, 29 Sep 2002, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: Well, I can actually testbed the configure changes for you, and use them for the Debian builds... But my requirements re. cmulocal are very different (aka. as long as it works for Debian's

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Ken Murchison
Quoting Andrew Diederich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'd just ask that if a known bug isn't going to be fixed, it needs to be documented and put upfront, big and large, where folks will see it. Shutting off compiler warnings with gcc 3.2 is an example. It broke compile, but folks were talking about

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Paul Fleming
I'm going to throw out my opinion too.. Please no flames. This isn't directed at anyone -- just my observations after using/maintaining Cyrus for 4 years (v1.5.19 still in production) First, CMU places a nice disclaimer in the docs. Cyrus is on the same order of NetNews to install --

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Tom Andrews
I am new to cyrus and the info-cyrus mailing list, but am a long time unix administrator and developer. Sendmail offers a similar product to cyrus, but lacking in some of the new features, for a large price tag. I prefer to deal with a few compilation gliches, provided the software works

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Andrew Diederich
Thanks for the help, Rob. -- Andrew From: Rob Siemborski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Andrew Diederich wrote: There are three things to do when a bug is found. 1) fix it, 2) document the bug and the workaround, or 3) hope people don't find it again. #3 is terribly

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Andrew Diederich
On Sat, Sep 28, 2002 at 08:44:52AM -0400, Ken Murchison wrote: Quoting Andrew Diederich [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There are three things to do when a bug is found. 1) fix it, 2) document the bug and the workaround, or 3) hope people don't find it again. #3 is terribly expensive in support

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-28 Thread Carson Gaspar
--On Friday, September 27, 2002 10:34 AM -0400 Ken Murchison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A lot of bitching, and no proposed fixes. It works for me, and I'm sure I have submitted patches in the past to fix this dain-bramaged configure behaviour. They have been ignored. Lots of the --with-foo

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-27 Thread Ken Murchison
soap box First off, why did you feel the need to send this directly to me? Cyrus is not _my_ software, I'm just a contributor. Secondly, I can understand your frustration, but your shitty attitude ain't gonna help. Joe Rhett wrote: We really must stop with the path pollution that you guys

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-27 Thread Michael Newlyn Blake
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Ken Murchison wrote: were looking at a path I never specified ( /usr/local/include ) and reading the include files from there, instead of the path I did specify: --with-dbdir=/opt/berkeleydb Now... I'm just guessing at the problem here. Is he saying that he

Re: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-27 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Michael Newlyn Blake wrote: However it does seem that when explicit paths are called for certain componants they should be placed in line before the assumed system paths. That is to say, if you want to build and link against a libfoo in /snert/myjunk/foo-8.3.4 then this

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-27 Thread Andrew Diederich
I'd just ask that if a known bug isn't going to be fixed, it needs to be documented and put upfront, big and large, where folks will see it. Shutting off compiler warnings with gcc 3.2 is an example. It broke compile, but folks were talking about it on the list. Many of the developers, and

RE: Time has come to stop with /usr/local path pollution!

2002-09-27 Thread Rob Siemborski
On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Andrew Diederich wrote: There are three things to do when a bug is found. 1) fix it, 2) document the bug and the workaround, or 3) hope people don't find it again. #3 is terribly expensive in support costs, like this string of emails. I have committed these two bugs to