From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Sep 8 22:25:32 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECDC037B422; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 22:25:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (kris@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id WAA13613; Fri, 8 Sep 2000 22:23:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: kris owned process doing -bs Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2000 22:23:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Kris Kennaway To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: asami@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Extending bsd.port.mk diagnostics when some of the patches fail to apply [patch for review] In-Reply-To: <39B377B3.B10E748C@FreeBSD.org> 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, 4 Sep 2000, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > I'm sure all hardcore porters are aware of this problem: when you are trying to > update some port and not all patches applied cleanly there is no easy way to > figure from error message which patches have been applied and which one has > not. The following patch is expected to make a life of porter a bit easier by > extending verbosity of error messages in this case (it doesn't affect anything > if all patches were applied cleanly). Looks good! Kris -- In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. -- Charles Forsythe To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message