Pick up PREFIX and X11BASE from the environment if it is set there.
(That way you can build it correctly with a different PREFIX/X11BASE
from the top, or you can go in there and do a "make" too.)
Remove RESTRICTED, but this one IS_INTERACTIVE now. We decided to shove
the license in the user's face and ask them if they will promise to read
it first. :)
Pick up PREFIX and X11BASE from the environment if it is set there.
(That way you can build it correctly with a different PREFIX/X11BASE
from the top, or you can go in there and do a "make" too.)
Remove RESTRICTED, but this one IS_INTERACTIVE now. We decided to shove
the license in the user's face and ask them if they will promise to read
it first. :)
===
* You agree to use your best efforts to see that any user of
e93 licensed hereunder complies with this License Agreement.
===
and I decided to do just that by shoving the license in their face. ;)
===
JOE is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the
terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the Free Software
Foundation; either version 1, or (at your option) any later version.
=== ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Since it's not (only) under GPL1, there shouldn't be any problem
with us distributing it in any medium.
ssh-askpass no longer uses wish, so chop the make rules that attempt to
locate it.
Go further to try and protect the ssh_host_key, since it's critical to
the operation and security of the machine.
(1) Add $Id$.
(2) Reorder variables. Remove unnecessary PKGNAME (was ==DISTNAME).
(3) Remove spurious comments about MAINTAINER, it's funny to if you
look at the diff between 0.9.5 and 0.9.6 though.
(4) Remove unnecessary "IS_INTERACTIVE=no", that is a binary (set/unset)
variable so it actually meant "yes" (and I'm sure that's not what
Andreas meant).
How do you think I found this out? It's a long story, but here's the
short version (no pun intended):
I had this upgraded to 0.5 on my machine, and had sent it to Chuck for
a review. Then Peter did an upgrade. So I did a "cvs update", which
showed one conflict (date in patch, understandable).
However, when I did a "cvs diff", it showed that Peter had forgotten
something. So here it is. :)
