From owner-cvs-all Sat Jan 26 12:23:50 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from squall.waterspout.com (squall.waterspout.com [208.13.56.12]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B2D437B402; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 12:23:37 -0800 (PST) Received: by squall.waterspout.com (Postfix, from userid 1050) id E8D7D9B08; Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:23:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2002 15:23:10 -0500 From: Will Andrews To: Trevor Johnson Cc: Murray Stokely , "Brian F. Feldman" , Will Andrews , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/x11/XFree86-4 Makefile Makefile.man distinfo pkg-plist pkg-plist.alpha pkg-plist.pc98 ports/x11/XFree86-4/files patch-c patch-f patch-i810 patch-j patch-k patch-mouse patch-r128 Message-ID: <20020126152310.W18609@squall.waterspout.com> Reply-To: Will Andrews Mail-Followup-To: Trevor Johnson , Murray Stokely , "Brian F. Feldman" , Will Andrews , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org References: <20020122152504.GO27267@freebsdmall.com> <20020126094152.X3164-100000@blues.jpj.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020126094152.X3164-100000@blues.jpj.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 10:00:39AM -0500, Trevor Johnson wrote: > - have a separate XFree86-devel port, with its name indicating that it is > unstable Brian Feldman suggested this idea, but I told him it wasn't reasonable since we may not actually use it after the release. I didn't hear any counter to that. I'd also like to point out that many things still have 'direct' dependencies on XFree86-4-*. We still have not created an X "task package" whose only purpose is to ensure that -some- kind of XFree86 is installed. > - from the changes between 4.1.0 and 4.2.0, choose a few and incorporate > them in the port as patches No time to test those (and if we don't have time to test them, what does that say about an 4.1->4.2 upgrade?). > - leave things the way they were, because few (no?) ports depend on > XFree86-4 but rather XFree86-4-Server, XFree86-4-libraries, etc., all of > which stayed at 4.1.0. No point in having made them more inconsistent than ever. > Perhaps when this kind of circumstance happens again, these possibilities > could be considered. They were. Please just drop this thread. There are bigger problems with our XFree86 handling than having to deal with so many people wanting X4.2 in ports less than a week before the release. And what's done is done, so let's solve some *real* problems. XFree86 4.2.0 will be in ports early next week after the release, mark my words. Regards, -- wca To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message