From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Feb 21 0:58: 4 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from m3.cs.berkeley.edu (m3.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.45.179]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6C2837BEDE for ; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:58:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca1-68.ix.netcom.com [209.109.232.68]) by m3.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA50906; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:57:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id AAA83939; Mon, 21 Feb 2000 00:57:47 -0800 (PST) To: Will Andrews Cc: FreeBSD Ports Subject: Re: Qt/KDE upgrade path References: <20000220201511.L44834@shadow.blackdawn.com> <20000221020812.P44834@shadow.blackdawn.com> From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 21 Feb 2000 00:57:41 -0800 In-Reply-To: Will Andrews's message of "Mon, 21 Feb 2000 02:08:13 -0500" Message-ID: Lines: 9 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.5 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: Will Andrews * So for ports that won't build on -STABLE, patches get sent in as BROKEN * for them, or do we just leave them broken with no notification? Don't bother if it's just to mark them BROKEN. We can revisit them after the release. Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message