Mailing-List: contact cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Sender: cygwin-apps-owner AT cygwin DOT com
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-apps-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-apps/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-apps-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/lists.html#faqs>
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 01:18:30 -0500
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-Apps AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: FW: whois package
Message-ID: <20020110061830.GD19033@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-apps AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-Apps AT cygwin DOT com
References: <911C684A29ACD311921800508B7293BA037D29AE AT cnmail>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <911C684A29ACD311921800508B7293BA037D29AE@cnmail>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 11:51:20PM -0500, Mark Bradshaw wrote:
>From: Mark Bradshaw <bradshaw AT staff DOT crosswalk DOT com>
>To: CA List <Cygwin-Apps AT cygwin DOT com>
>Subject: FW: whois package
>Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 23:51:20 -0500 
>
>It built OOTB.  I remove some source for an alternate mkpasswd app the
>author had included.  It wasn't needed for whois functionality.  I didn't
>really consider that patching the app.  Other than that, the only
>modifications that I made were to the Makefile to get things pointing in the
>right direction.  
>
>I know the readme isn't that informative, but there just wasn't that much to
>tell.  The author gave no instructions on the usage for whois, so I didn't
>bother either. 
>
>The revert patch puts things back together, including the mkpasswd source.
>It didn't seem like it really applied to whois though, so I didn't mention
>it in the readme.  If that bugs you I'll change it.  Again, I didn't change
>ANY whois source.  Oh, now that I think about it I did make one small change
>to some ancillary perl apps that help during the build process.  It was a
>one-liner that is so trivial I doubt anyone'd care, but kept them from
>causing problems under some conditions.  In any case, they're in the revert
>patch.
>
>Considering the small changes I made, I don't think it'd be necessary to
>split out another directory for cygwin patches.  But, you're the pro.  If
>you still think I should make the changes let me know.

From your description, it sounds like you made all of the right decisions.
I think the package sounds fine as is.

cgf