[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Mutt, slang, and ncurses question
At 03:40 AM 9/21/99 -0700, David Terrell wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 21, 1999 at 11:31:42AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 20, 1999 at 12:32:50PM -0600, Ken wrote:
>> > Greets:
>> > I run both FreeBSD and OpenBSD boxes. My preferred MUA is Mutt. I note
>> > that the OpenBSD package requires the slang library, while the FreeBSD
>> > can utilize either slang or ncurses. I am curious about which would be
>> > best to use on one of my FreeBSD boxes and why. There must be some
>> > OpenBSD utilizes slang and FreeBSD offers a choice?
>> Yep, no one bothered to provide a mutt with ncurses packages.
>> It's probably a bad idea anyway, as this would just confuse users :)
>I compiled mutt against ncurses and have no problems. Any reason
>you(?) thought slang was necessary?
Which OS are you referencing here? My OpenBSD boxes are minimal installs
w/o compilers, so I just grabbed the Mutt package, which needs libslang.
The FreeBSD port of Mutt is actually broken right now, but allows for use
of either libslang or ncurses. If neither is specified at the command line
during the make, it defaults to ncurses. The reason I thought libslang
might be better is that OpenBSD uses it, at least w/ the package, and I
figured whoever built the package was smarter than me. Or maybe there was
no good reason and they only did so because "it was there". Guess we'll
Failure is not an option- it comes bundled with your Microsoft product.