Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:32:46 -0500
From:      Alan Eldridge <alane@geeksrus.net>
To:        Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: autoconf 2.50
Message-ID:  <20011214003246.A98250@wwweasel.geeksrus.net>
In-Reply-To: <19794459125.20011214005824@serebryakov.spb.ru>; from lev@serebryakov.spb.ru on Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 12:58:24AM %2B0300
References:  <19794459125.20011214005824@serebryakov.spb.ru>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 12:58:24AM +0300, Lev Serebryakov wrote:
>Hello, ports! How are you?
>
>
> System has two identical ports now -- autoconf213 and autoconf. WHY?

Lev, 

I was in a hurry and I might have come off sounding abrasive when I didn't
mean to. When I said, "don't say update the ports that use old autoconf or
automake", what I should have said was:

Unfortunately, updating the ports that fail is not an option. Since ports,
by nature, are source that is not under our control, even in cases where it
is possible to do, updating would mean a lot of gratuitous patches that the
actual author of the ported software has no reason to take.

Also, some packages, such as KDE, are so large, and have such complex build
systems, that the amount of time and effort expended could not be justified.

-- 
Alan Eldridge
Just another $LANGUAGE hacker.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011214003246.A98250>