On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 03:05:02PM +0100, Robert Brooks wrote:
Eric Kolve wrote:
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 09:40:01AM +0100, Robert Brooks wrote:
Eric Kolve wrote:
I could have made a patch instead of just overwriting, but I thought it would be easier to install if I didn't patch since users would then have to locate the .pm files and directly patch them.
yes, hardly ideal, perhaps a patch in the tarball as an alternative method. Is there any chance the common code will get accepted into 2.64?
I am working on a more intelligent Makefile.PL that attempts to determine where you have installed SA and install over it.
hmmm, I guess I can do it myself, but what I'd like to do is add a patch for the common files to the SpamAssassin rpm and then make a separate rpm with SpamCopURI.pm etc in.
Okay, I see what you are saying. Would you then end up with something like this:
perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-patched-2.63-1.i386.rpm perl-Mail-SpamAssassin-SpamCopURI-0.14-1.i386.rpm
--eric
Its not likely this will get incorporated into 2.64.
yes, I see SA3.0 is not too far away.
-- Robert Brooks, Network Manager, Hyperlink Interactive Ltd robb@hyperlink-interactive.co.uk http://hyperlink-interactive.co.uk/ Tel: +44 (0)20 7240 8121 Fax: +44 (0)20 7240 8098
- Help Microsoft stamp out piracy. Give Linux to a friend today! -
Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss