From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Aug 31 8: 6:17 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@hub.freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5960737B406; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from trevor@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.11.4/8.11.4) id f7VF5ou72092; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:05:50 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from trevor) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 08:05:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Message-Id: <200108311505.f7VF5ou72092@freefall.freebsd.org> To: root@iaces.com, trevor@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/30166: ports Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Synopsis: ports State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback State-Changed-By: trevor State-Changed-When: Fri Aug 31 07:42:50 PDT 2001 State-Changed-Why: It looks like you want to have two separate ports, net/nettest for the Cray version from 1992 and net/nettest2001 for the new Wind River version. I notice that Wind River's supports IPv6. It wasn't obvious to me why a user would prefer to run the Cray version. Could the existing port simply be updated? If there is a reason to have the two separate ports, this should be stated in the pkg-descr or pkg-comment file (or both) so users can easily decide which to use even when installing from packages. I feel that the benchmarks category would be most suitable for both these ports, since it is more specific than the net category. Is there any objection to that? http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=30166 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message