Re: [Nmh-workers] How're we doing on nmh-1.2-RC1?

[Josh Bressers]

> > 
> > I checked in a fix for this just now, please let me know if there is still
> > anything wrong regarding mhn.defaults.
> 
> That change looks like it would do the trick. I also submitted a bug report
> via the savannah interface detailing that the pbm util calls in the
> mhn.defaults.sh script are incorrect.

I do admit the patch is more of a band-aid than a fix, but it'll do for now.
Much of this code needs some serious work, I'll fix it properly after 1.2.

> 
> I've been having a think about the way mhn.defaults is created, however,
> and now believe the shell script should be replaced. I think it makes more
> sense to search for programs with the configure script, and use
> the autoconf stuff to create mhn.defaults.

I question if this is the right thing to do.  For example, when these
packages get built for Fedora Extras, as little as possible is installed in
the buildroot.  That would result in a nearly empty mhn.defaults.

I'm of the opinion that we should have a rather generic example
mhn.defaults file, with something more complete in a contrib directory.
It then becomes the job of the system administrator and packager to set
reasonable defaults based on how the system looks.  I personally don't
enjoy it when strange image viewers start to launch while I'm reading my
mail.

-- 
    JB