From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 17 09:38:43 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6E4A16A4CE; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:38:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from TRANG.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A2B43D2F; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:38:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com) Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by TRANG.nuxi.com (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2HHcgVX094737; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:38:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i2HHcaCt094736; Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:38:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:38:36 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Gerald Pfeifer Message-ID: <20040317173836.GC92743@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <200403170818.i2H8IFYU008824@repoman.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.2-CURRENT Organization: The NUXI BSD Group X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3 90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5 cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang/gcc34 Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@FreeBSD.org List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:38:43 -0000 On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 10:42:46AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > > +# fscking Linux & GNU $*!% > > This is not appropriate for our ports tree, and -- while I am often > feeling portability pain as well and can understand your frustration > too well -- unwarranted and uncalled for in this case. I obviously didn't feel it was unwarranted as I committed it. :-) But I should have said SUSE and not GNU -- it was SUSE's pigheadedness a few months before any shipping OS product to refuse to "s/s86_64/amd64/g" because they "had beta users and it would be too hard on them"... and it was too hard for Suse's auto-build system to make the change and rebuild the distribution. Feh! The number of times in Unix and C and C++ history code authors were unwilling to change warts and bugs because there were already "20" or "100" installations really urks me due to their short sightedness. We now have how many Unix, C, and C++ users??? Compared to Jan 2003, we have how many more AMD64 users??