From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mads Martin Joergensen Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2008 20:24:24 +0000 Subject: Re: mlmmj-1.2.16-PRE2 released Message-Id: <20081103202424.GR28005@mmj.dk> List-Id: References: <1225668062.14901.42.camel@mopo-laptop> In-Reply-To: <1225668062.14901.42.camel@mopo-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: mlmmj@mlmmj.org * Chris Webb [Nov 03. 2008 19:20]: > "Morten K. Poulsen" writes: > > > Am I still missing something? > > For a long time now, I've done something clumsy along the lines of > > find . -name '*recieve*' | while read F; do mv $F `sed 's/recieve/receive/g' <<< "$F"`; done > find . -name '*voodo*' | while read F; do mv $F `sed 's/voodo/voodoo/g' <<< "$F"`; done > find . -type f | while read F; do sed -e s/recieve/receive/g -e s/voodo/voodoo/g -i $F; done > > as part of my package build for mlmmj. It'd be nice to get these trivial > spelling clean-ups upstream: how would you feel about a patch correcting the > spelling of 'receive' and 'voodoo' through the code and filenames if I were > to generate one? > > Of course, we could install a symlink from mlmmj-receive-strip to > mlmmj-recieve-strip so nothing will break for people using the old, > incorrectly spelled binary name. If someone makes the autotools cope with installing a symlink, I'll make a patch that warns in the logs something along the line of: "You are using the old obsolete name for invoking mlmmj-recieve. Please correct your invocation to use mlmmj-receive." do-all-the-voodo-here is not a binary, so I couldn't care less about that one. -- Mads Martin Joergensen, http://mmj.dk "Why make things difficult, when it is possible to make them cryptic and totally illogical, with just a little bit more effort?" -- A. P. J.