From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 7 11:51:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0B4616A4CE for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 11:51:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ADD643D54 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 11:51:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i37IoObv032799 for ; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 11:50:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id i37IoOB2032797; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 11:50:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 11:50:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200404071850.i37IoOB2032797@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Matthias Andree Subject: Re: ports/65297 [PATCH] mail/bogofilter: some ports use WITH_BDB_VER=,bogofilter use WITH_DB_VER X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Matthias Andree List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:51:19 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/65297; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Matthias Andree To: Andrey Slusar Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org, matthias.andree@gmx.de Subject: Re: ports/65297 [PATCH] mail/bogofilter: some ports use WITH_BDB_VER=,bogofilter use WITH_DB_VER Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 20:28:19 +0200 On Wed, 07 Apr 2004, Andrey Slusar wrote: > >Description: > Mainteiner CC-ed. Thanks. > Some ports eg cyrus-imapd, exim use WITH_BDB_VER=, mail/bogofilter > use WITH_DB_VER. It's not correct. There is no documentation that defines what the correct variant is. WITH_DB_VER might also be correct - the port is called db*, not bdb*. Anyways, your efforts to standardize the WITH_* variables are appreciated, but please have a documentation change to the Porter's handbook committed first so that it defines what the correct variant is. I therefore temporarily reject the patch, but I will approve of it later, after the documentation has been put into place.