INN 2.6.0 release candidate

[Julien ÉLIE]

Hi Noel,

First of all, thanks for your tests.


> One thing I noted is the .pullnews file was honoured in 2.5.4,
> even though changelog reflects change back in 2010 to pullnews.marks
> - I may see this biting some now the old method is completely removed,

Yes, INN 2.5.4 still uses ".pullnews".
The last modification date of pullnews is not the one in "History"
but in the RCSId field at the beginning of the file.

For INN 2.5.4:
RCSId:        $Id: pullnews.in 9505 2013-07-08 19:30:33Z iulius $

For INN 2.6.0rc1:
RCSId:        $Id: pullnews.in 9796 2015-03-18 20:46:20Z iulius $


You can note with 2.6.0:

# History:
#               Full changelog can be found in the Subversion repository 
of the
#               INN project.  Major changes are:
#
#               January 2010:  Geraint A. Edwards added header-only 
feeding (-B);
#               added ability to hashfeed (-a) - uses MD5 - 
Diablo-compatible;
#               enabled -m to remove headers matching (or not) a given 
regexp;
#               minor bug fix to rnews when -O; improved rnews 
reporting.


Isn't it enough?  (especially the first line refering to full changelog)
How would you prefer the beginning of the pullnews file to be presented?
No history section at all?  Adding a 2015 entry to mention the change of 
name
for the configuration file?



> not a big problem but I would include this caveat in any release
> announcement for 2.6.0.

The caveat will be included at the beginning of the announcement:

"The name and location of the pullnews configuration file have changed.  
It is now pullnews.marks, located in pathdb when pullnews is run as the 
news user, or otherwise in the running user's home directory.  This file 
was previously stored in .pullnews in the running user's home directory 
(even for the news user).  If you use pullnews, you need to manually 
move and rename the configuration file; otherwise, it will no longer 
work.  Note that the -c flag passed to pullnews allows to specify 
another configuration file, if need be."



> I note 'make update' did not install the newer man pages

That's strange.  Are you sure the directory where the newer
man pages are is in your path?

Could you please run "make -n update"?  (the "-n" flag will prevent
make from doing anything; it will just print the commands it would run)

Near the end of the output, you will see a line like:

     ln -s ninpaths.8 /home/news/share/man/man8/inpaths.8

It will show you where the newer man pages are installed
(here in /home/news/share/man directory).

Don't you see them on your system?

If you see any problems, do not hesitate to report them. Thanks!

-- 
Julien ÉLIE