From owner-freebsd-ports  Fri Apr 25 04:14:31 1997
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA08360
          for ports-outgoing; Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:14:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (ala-ca33-03.ix.netcom.com [199.35.209.99])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA08354
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.9) id EAA28222; Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:14:13 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199704251114.EAA28222@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com
CC: ports@freebsd.org, jdp@polstra.com
In-reply-to: <6230.861965978@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Subject: Re: ftp://freefall.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/LOCAL_PORTS
From: asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I don't want any more FTP sites on WC's T1 line, for one thing.  It's
 * overloaded and, given that we basically just finished shoving the
 * povray people off of it (for FTP), I think we'd look like hypocrites
 * if the freebsd project continued to use bandwidth for FTP when it
 * could just as easily put the bits on one of its mirrors (just as we
 * asked the povray people to do).

Heh.  I didn't know that.  Ok.

 * Anyway, I also suggest the following patch. ;)
 * 
 * Index: bsd.port.mk

Ok, I'll fix this and the ports (and the handbook) this weekend.

Satoshi