From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 7 17:53:11 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DE6837B401 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 17:53:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-relay1.yahoo.com (mail-relay1.yahoo.com [216.145.48.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A669E43F75 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 17:53:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from adrianm@yahoo-inc.com) Received: from adrianm.buenosaires.corp.yahoo.com (adrianm.buenosaires.corp.yahoo.com [172.24.82.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail-relay1.yahoo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14AC58B5B2 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 17:53:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from adrianm.buenosaires.corp.yahoo.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) h680r6NO011218 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:53:06 -0300 (ART) (envelope-from adrianm@yahoo-inc.com) Received: (from adrianm@localhost)h680r5Op011217 for freebsd-ports@freebsd.org; Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:53:05 -0300 (ART) X-Authentication-Warning: adrianm.buenosaires.corp.yahoo.com: adrianm set sender to adrianm@yahoo-inc.com using -f Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 21:53:05 -0300 From: Adrian Mugnolo To: FreeBSD Ports list Message-ID: <20030708005305.GA11041@adrianm.buenosaires.corp.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Subject: Q: correct origin for private package? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 00:53:11 -0000 Hi, I was wondering what a correct @comment ORIGIN:.* line should read for installed "private" packages? -- I mean private as opposed to the ones distributed as part of the FreeBSD Ports and Packages Collection. For example, the pkgdb(1) tool from the sysutils/portupgrade package complains about these not having registered a proper origin. Is this correct? If yes, what this line should look like for "unofficial" packages, if it needs to be included? Thanks in advance. Regards P.S. please cc my email address as I'm not subscribed to the list.