Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> 於 2019年9月21日 週六 上午5:35寫道： > > Hello and good evening once more. > > I am sorry, i was a in a total hurry this afternoon, only three > days of late summer left here before a lot of rain comes, and > i really wanted to get out with my bicycle. Sorry. >
Thank you very much for the fast reponses! No hurry :) > Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in <20190920144952.kff6g%[email protected]>: > |Chih-Hsuan Yen wrote in <CAMNjDR3R5GnwEmqCfyXHmR09W3mi06W9Py-pEnhi9wA=bQ\ > |[email protected]>: > ||I am a commiter of MacPorts, a package manager for Mac OS X/macOS. > ||Recently we are creating a package for this project as a replacement > ||of Heirloom's mailx. First I added this project as s-nail [1]. Later > | > |Thank you, great! > | > ||another MacPorts commiter pointed out that it should be better to call > ||the package s-mailx [2]. From https://www.sdaoden.eu/code.html, > ||s-mailx appears to be the current name, while s-nail is also used many > ||times. Is the current official name for this project s-mailx or > ||s-nail? I will appreciate any input. > | > |First of all this is all your thing. You can use the VAL_SID= and > |VAL_MAILX= make flags to adjust it the way you like, the default > |is VAL_SID=s- and VAL_MAILX=nail, but in use is also VAL_SID= > |VAL_MAILX=mailx, for example. We are a POSIX mailx. > > So i see you actually do that already! > Yep I'd like to keep command names the same as Heirloom's mailx. The first step to be a replacement :) > Yes, whatever way you want it, we should still be a drop-in > replacement for Heirloom mailx (with obsoletion warnings however, > if you use it for more than just plain POSIX mailx stuff). > This will no longer be true with v14.10.0 for more complicated > setups. > > ... > |You can well name it mailx, it can do that. But we are still > |s-nail for a while. > >From the first letter, I think we'll keep the package name s-nail and switch to s-mailx after 15.0 is out. > Great, Chih-Hsuan Yen. Thank you very much, and do not hesitate > to start screaming shall something not work out, please. > For example, may i ask why you require the gawk(1) awk > interpreter? I do no longer have a usable MacOS installation > around, i wonder why the default awk is not capable to dig our > build script? > Mac's awk reports an error during generation of makefiles. As a result generated makefiles are broken. $ bash ../mk/make-rules.sh su/*.c (...previous lines omitted...) $(ECHO_CC)$(CC) $(SU_CFLAGS) $(SU_INCS) -c -o $(@) $(SU_SRCDIR)su/prime.c su-017.o: $(SU_SRCDIR)su/sort.c \ $(SU_INCDIR)su/code.h $(SU_INCDIR)su/sort.h $(SU_INCDIR)su/code-in.h $(SU_INCDIR)su/code-ou.h $(ECHO_CC)$(CC) $(SU_CFLAGS) $(SU_INCS) -c -o $(@) $(SU_SRCDIR)su/sort.c su-018.o: $(SU_SRCDIR)su/utf.cawk: su/utf.c makes too many open files input record number 18, file source line number 74 As a record, the version of awk on macOS 10.14.6 is: $ awk --version awk version 20070501 > |Thank you! And ciao from Germany, > > Yes. And a nice weekend, if possible. > Thanks! > --steffen > | > |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, > |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one > |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off > |(By Robert Gernhardt) Best, Chih-Hsuan Yen
