From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Jan 11 15:04:49 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA14894 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 15:04:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from mail.HiWAAY.net (fly.HiWAAY.net [208.147.154.56]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA14888; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 15:04:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sprice@hiwaay.net) Received: from localhost (sprice@localhost) by mail.HiWAAY.net (8.9.1a/8.9.0) with SMTP id RAA29271; Mon, 11 Jan 1999 17:04:14 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 17:04:14 -0600 (CST) From: Steve Price To: Satoshi Asami cc: pfgiffun@bachue.usc.unal.edu.co, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why so many ghostscript ports? In-Reply-To: <199901112238.OAA86617@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 11 Jan 1999, Satoshi Asami wrote: # * My GNU ghostcript port was committed (thanks!), but I see in the web # * that we still have two older versions that IMHO should be nuked... # # You're probably right. Does anyone have objections to nuking # ghostscript (version 2) and ghostscript4, now that we have GNU # ghostscript5 and Alladin ghostscript55? Suits me just fine. Can we also close out PR ports/6312 which is for version 3.33 and happens to have been submitted by Pedro? :) -steve To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message