From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 30 17:30:14 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EC941065670; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:30:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-gx0-f182.google.com (mail-gx0-f182.google.com [209.85.161.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD698FC08; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:30:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by gxk28 with SMTP id 28so7033906gxk.13 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:30:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=M333fO8duDcT674md2pkRRVLFLTuajQziBsa5DzO0zc=; b=ZxK7k39Cm21O5JEuPAJ5yKLqqTTL6z99ns1oW7aSKp8W1TG/L4gqN7ZgtVrQYNFl8U y77tOz/vLKhcNfU22qw08TLFD4e0zoXDz5o3IUhviuZM8aHJnEPVYrsuMzjfFXerIgmH LBXbVFBCw9qsFs3nDTpScjoCCCKRLnVJxN+jI= Received: by 10.43.59.142 with SMTP id wo14mr38448icb.373.1314725413127; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:30:13 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.231.61.148 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 10:29:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20110830163933.GC17573@lonesome.com> References: <201108300823.p7U8NIfD038098@repoman.freebsd.org> <4E5CC44C.3070604@FreeBSD.org> <20110830111152.GF28186@home.opsec.eu> <4E5CD28A.1080809@FreeBSD.org> <20110830122726.GG28186@home.opsec.eu> <4E5D0856.8080505@FreeBSD.org> <20110830163933.GC17573@lonesome.com> From: Chris Rees Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 18:29:43 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: IOuFp2kM0Ec1ij-FfSMO1sta2Kc Message-ID: To: Mark Linimon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Matthias Andree Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/procmail Makefile X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:30:14 -0000 On 30 August 2011 17:39, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 05:57:10PM +0200, Matthias Andree wrote: >> How about if we added a new tag "OBSOLESCENT" or so that permits >> building the software only if it's already installed but refuses new >> installations? > > Right now if you set DEPRECATED you'll get a warning. =A0Shouldn't > that be sufficient without introducing a new mechanism that enforces > a policy? +1 I agree-- isn't that what DEPRECATED is for?? Chris