Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 26 Jun 2005 19:31:58 +0200
From:      Michael Nottebrock <lofi@freebsd.org>
To:        Alexander Leidinger <netchild@freebsd.org>
Cc:        cvs-ports@freebsd.org, nork@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports CHANGES UPDATING ports/Mk bsd.port.mk ports/accessibility/linux-atk Makefile pkg-plist ports/archivers/stuffit Makefile ports/astro/linux-setiathome Makefile ports/audio/baudline Makefile ports/audio/linux-arts ...
Message-ID:  <200506261932.03158.lofi@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050626183627.38a1b725@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
References:  <200506172259.j5HMxTad068378@repoman.freebsd.org> <200506261748.49553.lofi@freebsd.org> <20050626183627.38a1b725@Magellan.Leidinger.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart1301432.xrDsBqfIkl
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Sunday, 26. June 2005 18:36, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
> > hier(7):
> >
> >                X11R6/    X11R6 distribution executables, libraries, etc
> >                           (optional).
> >                           bin/      X11R6 binaries (servers, utilities,
> > local packages/ports)
> >                           [...]
> >                           lib/      X11R6 libraries.
> >                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> "X11 binaries" refers to "servers, utilities, local packages/ports". I
> read "X11R6 libraries" similar to "X11 binaries", I interpret it as:
> someone was too lazy to make a list for the lib/ entry too.
>
> That's how I understand this. I hope I was able to successfully
> describe my POV.

Okay, I give up. This will be my last mail on the subject at hand.=20

Let me just say this: There's little sense in providing documentation and=20
guidelines if a long enough period / big enough magnitude of non-compliance=
=20
is enough to make everybody assume that the documentation is wrong and need=
s=20
to be creatively interpreted in order to match the status quo.

I also have great doubts that there's any chance of ever getting that kind =
of=20
confirmational response you're looking for - from portmgr, RE or whoever yo=
u=20
feel should have the last word. I'd love to be proven wrong though.

=2D-=20
   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi@freebsd.org
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org

--nextPart1301432.xrDsBqfIkl
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQBCvuaTXhc68WspdLARAkGFAKCDIYLpcs+qWKgPmph5QAikJJHbJQCgmP6q
LTTBnHYaWrH6rMDuhkHTEL0=
=IUIn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart1301432.xrDsBqfIkl--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200506261932.03158.lofi>