From owner-cvs-all  Mon Sep 14 05:35:18 1998
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all>
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA27838
          for cvs-all-outgoing; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 05:35:18 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from owner-cvs-all)
Received: from vader.cs.berkeley.edu (vader.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.38.234])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA27832
          for <committers@freebsd.org>; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 05:35:17 -0700 (PDT)
          (envelope-from asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu)
Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca5-24.ix.netcom.com [209.109.234.24]) by vader.cs.berkeley.edu (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA02721; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 05:35:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.8.8/8.6.9) id FAA23018; Mon, 14 Sep 1998 05:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 05:34:58 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199809141234.FAA23018@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu>
To: mark@grondar.za
CC: committers@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199809140819.KAA19687@gratis.grondar.za> (message from Mark Murray on Mon, 14 Sep 1998 10:19:51 +0200)
Subject: Re: Updating ports.
From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * From: Mark Murray <mark@grondar.za>

 * Is it OK to go ahead and update ports for aout --> ELF? Or is it
 * still required to do this through the maintainer?

I'd say go for it.  We're running short of time, and after what you
had to go through with perl, I'll have to trust you more than most of
the maintainers (including myself). :)

Satoshi