[PATCH] Re: Recovering bogofilter in Evo... how can we do it?

Tim darkxst at fastmail.fm
Wed Jan 14 22:00:10 UTC 2015

On 15/01/15 06:48, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 09:27 +0000, Iain Lane wrote:
>> Which means, unless I'm mistaken (I only looked briefly), that someone
>> so interested could submit a patch to Evolution, preferably upstream,
>> to move the check from build to runtime.
> I took a look at Evolution's code.  Evolution already makes a runtime
> check for the bogofilter program and disables the plugin if it doesn't
> exist: modules/bogofilter/evolution-bogofilter.c:bogofilter_available()
Those run time checks were removed in commit c539a9ec which was included 3.8. This would at least need to be reverted, however in that case the
bogofilter module always gets loaded, it just drops off the list of known filters if the binary is missing. This was probably the motivation for
them moving to build-time checks.
> The problem is that if you don't have bogofilter installed then the
> configure step of the source will fail with an error, unless you
> --disable-bogofilter which is apparently why this was added.
> However, that's not actually true: if you set the environment variable
> BOGOFILTER to a value before you invoke configure then whatever value
> you provide is used as the path to the bogofilter program that Evolution
> checks for at build time... and the configure step DOES NOT CHECK that
> this program exists, until runtime as above.
given this will require a patch anyway to add runtime checks, its probably cleaner to use
 --enable-bogofilter and drop the check from configure.ac
> So, for the Ubuntu package, it should be sufficient to change the build
> of Evolution to set BOGOFILTER=/usr/bin/bogofilter before running
> "configure".  It doesn't look like there's any nice package-controllable
> way to add env.vars. to the configure line in cdbs, but you could add
> this to the "rules" file:
>   export BOGOFILTER=/usr/bin/bogofilter
> then remove --disable-bogofilter from DEB_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAGS, and it
> should work just as we'd like.
patches are generally best attached to the corresponding bug report.
However that change by itself is not enough, not only will the bogofilter module load, it will
have no idea that the binary might be missing!
> Yes?

More information about the ubuntu-desktop mailing list