Bernd Plagge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You should be using aspell in which case your config option should
> be
>
> --with-ispell=/usr/bin/aspell
I was about to say: actually in my case it turns out to be
--with-ispell=/usr/local/share/aspell/ispell
but then I thought hey maybe he really means to use aspell rather than
aspell's ispell-compatibility command. So I tried:
/usr/local/bin/aspell
and now it works!
So the compatibility command is not compatible. And now I see why:
/usr/local/share/aspell/ispell (the compatibility command) is a shell script
and I guess fork/exec doesn't work directly for shell scripts.
And apparently aspell itself is already close enough to compatible with
ispell, for the purposes of how SqWebMail uses it.
A note about this in the documentation might be helpful, particularly for
those of us who take things too literally - in this case the fact that the
option is called "with-ispell".
The doc currently says:
> SqWebMail can use either the ispell or the aspell package for spell checking
> messages. Install ispell or aspell before installing SqWebMail.
I wonder what the instructions to install the spell-checker first are
referring to - I never discovered a reason why this was required. I sort of
thought from the sentence that that the configure script would find aspell,
making it possibly unnecessary to use the --with-ispell option. The
--with-ispell description elsewhere in the doc seems to confirm this. But
in my case it was clearly necessary to set --with-ispell correctly before
spell-checking would work. Maybe the configure script only looks in certain
places, and maybe only for the name ispell and not aspell? I didn't check
on this.
In any case besides possibly correcting that sentence it might be useful to
add the sentence:
When using aspell be sure the --with-ispell option refers to the
correct full path for aspell, NOT for aspell's ispell-compatibility
command.
or something slightly different if it turns out that ./configure is supposed
to fine aspell in some cases.
If somebody can explain to me exactly how this is all _supposed_ to work,
then I could take a shot at a clearer improvement to the doc, and otherwise
maybe somebody who already knows could take care of this?
Thanks,
Kurt Bigler
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Bernd
>
>
> on 2/24/03 11:08 PM, Kurt Bigler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> When I try to do a spell check in a SqWebMail session I get the internal
>> error
>> which is an indication that ispell_run failed. From looking at the code, the
>> are just lots of possible causes for this failure, and I am wondering if
>> anyone can suggest what might be the more likely possible reasons.
>>
>> Short of that I suppose I can sprinkle enomem calls around in a bunch more
>> places to narrow it down. (By the way, if I make changes to sources in the
>> sqwebmail subdirectory can I do make and make install in the sqwebmail
>> subdirectory and not bother doing it in the top-level directory in order to
>> test changes?)
>>
>> I had already built SqWebMail with the option
>>
>> --with-ispell=/usr/bin/ispell
>>
>> and today I actually installed aspell, and put a symbolic link to aspell's
>> ispell-compatibility executable at /usr/bin/ispell.
>>
>> The dictionary specifications should have matched - I tried several
>> possibilities to make sure, including leaving ISPELLDICT unchanged, editing
>> ISPELLDICT to contain "en_US", removing ISPELLDICT entirely, which I think
>> should have caused a default to "en".
>>
>> Running aspell dump dicts shows:
>>
>> en
>> en_CA
>> en_CA-w-accents
>> en_GB
>> en_GB-w-accents
>> en_US
>> en_US-w-accents
>>
>> And aspell appears to accept "english" also.
>>
>> Running ispell directly appears to work fine, with or without explicit
>> specification of any of the available dictionaries, including "english".
>>
>> Thanks for any help.
>>
>> -Kurt Bigler
>>
>>
>
> --
> bp mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
