[486] in Release_7.7_team
Re: sun4 8.0A: I can't preview or print from ez
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Albert Dvornik)
Tue Apr 16 14:10:13 1996
From: "Albert Dvornik" <bert@MIT.EDU>
To: Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
Cc: sol24@MIT.EDU, Carla Fermann <carla@MIT.EDU>
Cc: release-team@MIT.EDU, irix53@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: "[97] in Solaris_2.4"
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 14:09:59 EDT
> I am under the impression that it's basically done, but has been
> displaced by his higher priority academic committments.
Something like that.
> Bert: Can you FINISH this?
Yes and no. =) Read on.
Transcript 4.1 installation currently lacks about four mostly minor
things, all of which should be fixed by the time it is released upon
the unsuspecting users, and which are listed below along with my
assessments of the effort needed and the importance.
However, I have built and tested Transcript on Solaris 2.3/2.4, IRIX
5.2 and Ultrix, and all the parts of the Transcript distribution that
other things may be relying on (ie, those that existed in Transcript
2.1, which is what is currently on the packs) work fine.
Left to do:
(1) The binaries it currently installs are left unstripped.
[trivial change, relatively unimportant]
(2) All of the files I checked out in RCS should be checked in.
There are also a lot of files from Adobe that we don't use,
so leaving them not checked out would reduce clutter a lot.
[easy but time-consuming,
medium importance although not visible outside of the source tree]
(3) The current installation procedure does not install any manpages.
[easy, required]
(4) The manpages should be proofread and possibly edited.
In particular, we should probably reduce user confusion by
removing all references to spooling options for SYSV systems,
since our SYSV systems used BSD-style spooling.
[easy but time-consuming, IMO important]
We should also add the copyright/user rights notice that we
have added to the current enscript manpage.
[easy, medium]
(5) There are some strange bugs under IRIX in some of the programs
that were added between Transcript 2.1 and 4.1. We could fail
to install them on the packs with no user impact, but they are
sort of neat, so fixing would be better.
See next piece of mail for details.
[unknown effort level (possibly hard), medium importance]
I would like to off-load some of this to someone else; I suspect (5)
is the most likely candidate, followed by (4), since they seem easiest
to hand off. I can wrap up the rest.
I'll talk to Bill, and we'll make sure mail gets sent if there's any
conclusion of general impact.
Platform-wise details are coming soon to a mailbox/discuss meeting
near you.
--bert
