X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Delivered-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org Received: from ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org (unknown [79.160.13.133]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: n@tanael.org) by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 78505DC0167; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:15:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 16:15:35 +0100 From: Natanael Copa To: Isaac Dunham Cc: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] considering packaging another mailx Message-ID: <20150127161535.698aa7dd@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> In-Reply-To: <20140915143728.GA514@muslin> References: <20140913203317.GA5578@newbook> <20140915104643.25dea7f5@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> <20140915143728.GA514@muslin> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.11.0 (GTK+ 2.24.25; x86_64-alpine-linux-musl) X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel Precedence: list List-Id: Alpine Development List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm bringing up this old issue because there are a couple of CVE issues: http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q4/1066 Do you think it would be possible to completely replace main/mailx with heirloom-mailx without breaking too much? More specifically, does heirloom/mailx' mail implementation support all the args in current mail/mailx? -nc On Mon, 15 Sep 2014 07:37:29 -0700 Isaac Dunham wrote: > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:46:43AM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote: > > On Sat, 13 Sep 2014 13:33:17 -0700 > > Isaac Dunham wrote: > > > > > I'm inclined to think that in the short term, heirloom-mailx would be > > > a significant improvement over our current main/mailx. > > > > Agree. > > > > > What I'd like to do is add testing/heirloom-mailx providing mailx; > > > I have a preliminary aport without the provides part. > > > In the future, upgrading to s-nail seems like a logical path; but > > > I think that using s-nail now might be hasty. > > > > The upstream tarball is named mailx so i think you can just call it > > testing/mailx and we simply purge unmaintained/mailx. > > > > Thank you very much for following this up! > > I think you're getting packages a little mixed up due to all the > occurences of mailx. > > There are two preexisting packages: > > unmaintained/mailx-support > main/mailx > > mailx-support is the "lockspool" utility from OpenBSD, which should > probably be used whenever mbox-format spools are used. > If it were renamed to lockspool, that would be more informative. > > main/mailx is in main, so I don't want to purge it just yet. > But it would be more accurate to rename it to main/mail > > Now, a note: If heirloom-mailx gets renamed to mailx, it will need one > alteration: > I'm using the package name to rename mailx.1 so it doesn't conflict with > man-pages. > In my experiene, the magic that the fts APKBUILD uses to try to avoid > intalling fts-doc along with man-pages doesn't work, so I'd rather not > duplicate it. > > Thanks, > Isaac Dunham > > > --- > Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org > Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org > --- > --- Unsubscribe: alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org Help: alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org ---