Re: Installation fails because of mutt_dotlock
On 2005-02-02 23:14:36 +0000, Paul Walker wrote:
> Do you have a preferred way that you'd like this to go? Maybe for an
> installation attempt to be made, but without a make error resulting
> if it fails?
The problem it that it overrides the possible mutt_dotlock installed
by the user (e.g. it could be a symlink to /usr/bin/mutt_dotlock).
Several possible other solutions:
1) The --enable-external-dotlock could take an optional value,
that would be an existing mutt_dotlock program. In this case,
Mutt shouldn't install mutt_dotlock, and $dotlock_program would
default to the string given as the --enable-external-dotlock
value. For instance:
./configure --prefix=$HOME --enable-external-dotlock=/usr/bin/mutt_dotlock
2) Have an option to make dotlocking optional, i.e. if Mutt (or
mutt_dotlock) doesn't have enough permission for some particular
mailbox, then dotlocking is not used for this mailbox. This can
be useful if all the NFS mailboxes are under the user's home
directory (this is my case); here /var/mail/* is local to the
machine, and fcntl() can be used without any problem (both exim4
and procmail use it by default).
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA