From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Aug 5 01:48:32 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA00513 for ports-outgoing; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (ala-ca8-36.ix.netcom.com [207.93.141.164]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA00508 for ; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:48:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.8.6/8.6.9) id BAA16038; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 01:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199708050848.BAA16038@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> To: jfieber@indiana.edu CC: ports@freebsd.org In-reply-to: (message from John Fieber on Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:38:21 -0500 (EST)) Subject: Re: Versionless ports From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk * I was just putting together ports for the handbook and FAQ which Great! I was thinking about these too, you know. :) * 1. The documents don't have distinct versions---grabbing the : * 2. The PLIST for these ports cannot be known in advance, so I * build the plist (in ${WRKDIR}) immediately after installing, * before registering. Is there any problem with doing this? I think it's probably better for someone (you?) to create source tarballs once in a while and put it up in LOCAL_PORTS. The ports should be for a known working version -- we don't want the build to fall over because the user typed "make" just after someone committed a bogus .sgml file. * 3. Where should these "document" ports live? I think it warrants a new category all by itself. How about "documents", with the following it pkg/COMMENT: === Documentation for FreeBSD systems. === We can also say something about the processing tools not belonging here, but that's obvious from the existence of "textproc" category. Satoshi