From owner-freebsd-ports  Wed Apr 26 14:42:09 1995
Return-Path: ports-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id OAA27533
          for ports-outgoing; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 14:42:09 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id OAA27521
          ; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 14:42:06 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.cdrom.com: Host localhost didn't use HELO protocol
To: Scott Mace <smace@metal-mail.neosoft.com>
cc: ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: tcl/tk/tclX/dp/incr-tcl/etc 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 26 Apr 95 15:15:57 MDT."
             <199504262115.PAA02299@metal.ops.neosoft.com> 
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 14:42:05 -0700
Message-ID: <27518.798932525@freefall.cdrom.com>
From: Gary Palmer (FreeBSD/ARM Team) <gpalmer@freefall.cdrom.com>
Sender: ports-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <199504262115.PAA02299@metal.ops.neosoft.com>, Scott Mace writes:
>What do yall think about integrating all of them into 2 binaries:
>tcl and wishx.  This is what I (NeoSoft) uses, and is a much more 
>complete environment.

Ask the maintainers of the ORIGIONAL tarballs to do this. Ports is (IMNSHO)
meant to be a collection of PATCHED sources so that they work on FreeBSD 2.x,
not a collections of ports of software in the form which we'd like to
see them. The ports tree is meant to be a small, light set of makefiles,
patches & support files, which this re-write would certainly not be
AFAIK.

Gary