From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Sep 30 02:35:23 2010
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033)
	id 9ACD3106566C; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 02:35:23 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 02:35:23 +0000
From: Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org>
To: "Philip M. Gollucci" <pgollucci@p6m7g8.com>
Message-ID: <20100930023523.GA62769@FreeBSD.org>
References: <201009280826.o8S8QEQX083506@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20100929063608.GA90349@FreeBSD.org> <4CA3A3C9.3060009@p6m7g8.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4CA3A3C9.3060009@p6m7g8.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Cc: Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh <sunpoet@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/mDNSResponder Makefile
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree
	<cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 02:35:23 -0000

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 08:38:33PM +0000, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
> On 09/29/10 06:36, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 08:26:14AM +0000, Sunpoet Po-Chuan Hsieh wrote:
> >> sunpoet     2010-09-28 08:26:14 UTC
> >>
> >>   FreeBSD ports repository
> >>
> >>   Modified files:
> >>     net/mDNSResponder    Makefile 
> >>   Log:
> >>   - Bump PORTREVISION for patch-mDNSPosix_Makefile modification
> >>   
> >>   Approved by:    pgollucci (mentor)
> > 
> > I'm still curious why PORTREVISION was bumped here: modified hunk just
> > appears to fix dependencies in Makefile; resulting package should remain
> > the same.  I'd like to hear yours and your mentor rationale for bumping
> > it here for no apparent (for me) reason.
> > 
> I wasn't paying enough attention.  It was an error on my part.

OK, thanks for clarification.  I just wanted to be sure I understand
things correctly.

./danfe