Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:38:34 -0600 (CST) From: Gerald Pfeifer <gerald@pfeifer.com> To: Eitan Adler <eadler@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Boris Samorodov <bsam@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r307065 - in head: Mk x11-toolkits/linux-f10-openmotif Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1211111535090.2085@tuna.site> In-Reply-To: <CAF6rxgkAjSJi_qzVk%2BjT0w=H==aDLH7UY1H0tTS_Rv_PX2hU_w@mail.gmail.com> References: <201211061238.qA6CcqaY060705@svn.freebsd.org> <CAF6rxgkAjSJi_qzVk%2BjT0w=H==aDLH7UY1H0tTS_Rv_PX2hU_w@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 6 Nov 2012, Eitan Adler wrote: > Any commit to to bsd.*.mk is considered a "sweeping change" > > Please see: http://www.freebsd.org/portmgr/implementation.html I'm reading this, and I think it goes to far. For example, how would adding support for USE_GCC=4.9+ be a sweeping change? Or removing something that can be proven (recursive grep, say) not to affect any port in the tree any more? Practically, not according to the letter of the law? Gerald
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.LNX.2.00.1211111535090.2085>