From owner-freebsd-ports  Mon Dec 30 02:00:39 1996
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id CAA18727
          for ports-outgoing; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 02:00:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tky007.tth.expo96.ad.jp (root@tky007.tth.expo96.ad.jp [133.246.32.58])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id CAA18722
          for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 02:00:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tky007.tth.expo96.ad.jp (masafumi@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.tky007.tth.expo96.ad.jp (8.8.4/3.4W4-SMTP) with ESMTP id TAA11227; Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:00:38 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <199612301000.TAA11227@mail.tky007.tth.expo96.ad.jp>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, jmg@nike.efn.org
Cc: max@wide.ad.jp
Subject: Re: xinvaders checksum mismatch...
From: Masafumi NAKANE/=?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQ2Y6LDJtSjgbKEI=?= <max@wide.ad.jp>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.54 on Emacs 19.28.1, Mule 2.3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:00:37 +0900
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

    jmg> if you remove the md5 file...  it will build and work but
    jmg> with lots of warnings...

For now, I just updated the md5 checksum.  But as you said, it looks
like some work is required.

    jmg> thought you guys would like to know...  should I file a pr on
    jmg> this sort of thing?  or just mail you guys?  thanks for the
    jmg> info... ttyl..

As David already said, it's probably better to send-pr.  Especially,
this port has no maintainer and someone in the ports team should take
care of, but with that kind of situation, it is easier for us to work
if PR is filed.

     Thanks,
Max