From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Mar 28 23: 0:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4345D14F52 for ; Sun, 28 Mar 1999 23:00:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.2/8.9.2) id XAA08682; Sun, 28 Mar 1999 23:00:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 23:00:01 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199903290700.XAA08682@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Neil Blakey-Milner Subject: Re: ports/10837: New license mechanism for ports. Reply-To: Neil Blakey-Milner Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR ports/10837; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Neil Blakey-Milner To: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Subject: Re: ports/10837: New license mechanism for ports. Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 09:00:02 +0000 On Sun 1999-03-28 (18:25), I wrote: > These two patches, first one to bsd.port.mk, and the other one > to the /usr/src/usr.sbin/pkg_install directory. > +.if exists(${LICENSE}) > +PKG_ARGS+= -n ${LICENSE} > +.else > +.if exists(${LICENSES}/${LICENSE}) > +PKG_ARGS+= -n ${LICENSES}/${LICENSE} > +.endif > +.endif Obviously, there should be a check against that version variable, or the version variable should be updated, depending on the method decided upon. (Hence my problems with just bumping the minimum - people would be a bit irritated having to fetch another upgrade kit after the fetch -A one) Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@rucus.ru.ac.za To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message