From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 18 14:19:23 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E47106564A for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:19:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gerald@pfeifer.com) Received: from relay03.pair.com (relay03.pair.com [209.68.5.17]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6701A8FC17 for ; Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 61358 invoked from network); 18 Jun 2011 14:19:21 -0000 Received: from 190.197.15.20 (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (190.197.15.20) by relay03.pair.com with SMTP; 18 Jun 2011 14:19:21 -0000 X-pair-Authenticated: 190.197.15.20 Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 08:19:21 -0600 (CST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Ruslan Mahmatkhanov In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <201106021631.p52GVgHM038132@repoman.freebsd.org> <20110602165708.GA61311@atarininja.org> <4DE7D4B4.3040302@yandex.ru> <20110602195248.GA62894@atarininja.org> <4DE7FA38.2040307@yandex.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Wesley Shields , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/net/erlyvideo Makefile pkg-plist X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Jun 2011 14:19:23 -0000 On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > What's more important than that, I think, is addressing this in a > more systematic manner to prevent new occurrences from slipping in: > > So I went ahead and filed PR ports/157566: portlint: Warng about use > of ${FIND}...${XARGS} {RM}. Perhaps you can cook up a patch? :-) > > In my experience, the portlint maintainer is very responsive in making > this kind of change or accepting/fixing proposed patches, and I encourage > all of us doing it Marcus now had a question to that PR I sent (PR/157566). Could those arguing in favor of not using ${FIND}...${XARGS} {RM} provide their take there, please? Thank you, Gerald