probably not. I will disown it
Search Criteria
Package Details: heirloom-ex-vi-cvs 2011.06.22-1
Package Actions
| Package Base: | heirloom-ex-vi-cvs |
|---|---|
| Description: | The traditional Vi |
| Upstream URL: | http://ex-vi.sourceforge.net/ |
| Category: | devel |
| Licenses: | |
| Submitter: | WFCody |
| Maintainer: | None |
| Last Packager: | None |
| Votes: | 2 |
| First Submitted: | 2011-01-15 19:36 |
| Last Updated: | 2011-06-22 12:14 |
Latest Comments
Comment by WFCody
Comment by haawda
vi from [core] now also uses cvs sources. Is this package still needed?
Comment by aksr
WFCody: Hi, please rename licences to licenses (lines 48 and 49).
Comment by WFCody
Thanks! updated. Tell me if you want to take over mantainership :)
Anonymous comment
Here a fixed PKGBUILD: https://gist.github.com/1039932
Comment by WFCody
OK thanks a lot for letting me know I run all those experimental things as chroots and do not get full testing on them. I will try to find a more standards-compliant way of writing installs.
Anonymous comment
@WFCody The same here like with heirloom-pkgtools-cvs, the install -D option is a problem in the PKGBUILD in case you already have installed UCB Heirloom:
install: illegal option -- D
usage: install [-cs] [-g group] [-m mode] [-o owner] file ... destination
install -d [-g group] [-m mode] [-o owner] dir
Breche ab ...
[1] 10525 exit 2 unipkg
Comment by WFCody
Updated
Thanks for all the help :) If you want to take over mantainership, just ask :)
Anonymous comment
1. The CVS sources miss the file "regexp.h" (it tries to use /usr/include/regexp.h, which it isn't meant to and fails). I copied the one found in a versioned .tar.bz2 file (which the 'vi' package in the [core] repository is built from).
2. In package(), it should be 'make DESTDIR="$pkgdir" install' and not just 'make install'.
3. The licen[cs]e file in the CVS sources is named "LICENSE" and not "LICENCE" ("S" not "C"). Fix that in package().