kbd-1.08 patch [was: Re: New kbd package release.]
matthias at winterdrache.de
Tue Oct 15 14:50:06 PDT 2002
On Tue, 15 Oct 2002 17:33:19 +0200 Matthias Benkmann
<matthias at winterdrache.de> wrote:
> that are not installed by default.
> Furthermore, one of the problems the old patch has fixed was declared a
> feature by the maintainer, so instead of fixing it in the code, my new
> patch fixes the manpage to properly describe the behaviour.
I've just got a reply from the kbd maintainer. Apparently he just didn't
like my patch but is considering to do something else later. Now I wonder
what we should do for LFS.
a) patch the manpage as in the patch I've posted. This would be
inconsistent with LFS systems so far and could be inconsistent with future
systems (when Andries Brouwer does something with kbd) but at least the
manpage would reflect the actual behaviour.
b) use the old patch to disable searching the current directory.
Consistent with older LFS, but different behaviour than official kbd
(although this behaviour is undocumented). Could be consistent with future
LFS systems (when/if AEB updates kbd to fix this in some way)
c) don't do anything, i.e. don't document the current behaviour and don't
change it. Wait and see how kbd develops. Inconsistent with older and
maybe future LFS, undocumented surprising behaviour, but smaller patch.
Just to put this into perspective. This will only ever hit you if you
issue loadkeys -d in a directory other than /usr/share/kbd/keymaps that
contains a file called defkeymap.map. In that case the defkeymap.map file
in the current directory will be loaded and not (as the manpage suggests)
the real default keymap in /usr/share/kbd/keymaps. But who has
defkeymap.map files lying around outside of /usr/share/kbd/keymaps/?
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having enough sense to be lazy.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev