getting pine to run under fedora 0.94 -- a couple issues

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, Jeremy Portzer wrote:

> Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > 
> >   when i asked about this on another list, i'm sure i was pointed to a
> > filed bugzilla entry on this.  just now, i tried to query for this report,
> > but was utterly unable to find it.  i tried to be as general as possible,
> > "fedora", "test2", didn't even specify a status or anything. but got no
> > hits.
> > 
> >   can someone provide the magic incantation that would have produced this
> > bug report, based on the relevant keywords?  sometimes, bugzilla can be 
> > maddeningly non-productive.
> > 
> 
> I think you're referring to this:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=101982
> 
> I found it by doing a quick search on "libcom_err.so.3" .  It was filed 
> on the "distribution" component which maybe is why you didn't find it. 
> I guess this is correct because it can't be a problem with pine, since 
> there is no pine in FC test2, but it's also not really a problem with 
> kerberos, since nothing else needs this.  Not sure how this can be resolved.

i know, it's a tough call.  even bill from red hat observes, in that bug
report, that it's not proper to obsolete pine.  but, OTOH, if it's not
part of the official distro, there's no obligation on red hat's part to
see that it still works.  bummer.

i like pine since it's CLI -- i have no overwhelming interest in a 
GUI-based email client, but i suspect i'll have to bite the bullet
and move over at some point.  (for people who migrated off of pine,
what did you find the easiest to move to?  just curious.)

> In answer to someone else's question on this thread about where to get 
> the SRPM, you can just use the one from Red Hat Linux 9, which is a 
> heavily patched version of 4.44.  Be sure to get the one from the 
> updates tree.  Also, you don't need to edit the spec manually, you can 
> just do this command on the SRPM:

> 	rpm --rebuild --define "nokerberos 1" pine-4.44-19.90.0.src.rpm

ah, i wasn't aware of the command-line --define.  but a couple of 
questions:

1) are you sure you mean "rpm" and not "rpmbuild"?

2) in any case, i don't see the "--define" option in the man page
   for either of these commands.  it would have made my life much
   simpler if that option had been documented.  or am i once again
   looking in the wrong place?

rday

p.s.  i just picked up eric foster-johnson's recent RPM book.  i'm
guessing that that's fairly up-to-date info, so it's time to start
perusing, i guess.