From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 24 19:12:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035CE16A4CE for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 19:12:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from redqueen.elvandar.org (cust.94.120.adsl.cistron.nl [195.64.94.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EDD343D4C for ; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 19:12:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from remko@elvandar.org) Received: from [10.0.2.122] (nimrod.elvandar.intranet [10.0.2.122]) by redqueen.elvandar.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47F0810685E; Sat, 24 Jul 2004 21:12:50 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4102B4B2.3060705@elvandar.org> Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 21:12:50 +0200 From: Remko Lodder X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joel Dahl References: <20040724150905.GA998@rogue.acs-et.com> <200407241953.54125.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net> <1090695584.16695.12.camel@dude.automatvapen.se> In-Reply-To: <1090695584.16695.12.camel@dude.automatvapen.se> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at elvandar.org cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: change in ports rc.d script behaviour X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 19:12:54 -0000 Joel Dahl wrote: > On Sat, 2004-07-24 at 19:53, Michael Nottebrock wrote: > >>On Saturday 24 July 2004 17:09, Mike Makonnen wrote: >> >> >>>I know this commit breaks the print/cups port and eik@ has said that the >>>following ports are also broken: >> >>Has this been approved by RE/portmgr? > > >>From the commit message: > "Discussed with: portmgr" > > I don't know if this means "approved" though... > Okay, i am in no way an portmgr or something similiar, but i feel this is getting a long discussion. Perhaps it is smart to backout the change, and let Mike and the portmaintainers generate some patches to make sure the ports still work (especially apache which is frequently used imho). After that the portmgr's can announce this change. Do not get me wrong, i think that it is a good idea, but perhaps not at this point in time. Summary: Backout change and provide updates to the ports, discuss with portmgr and let portmgr announce it... my $0.02 -- Kind regards, Remko Lodder |remko@elvandar.org Reporter DSINet |remko@dsinet.org Projectleader Mostly-Harmless |remko@mostly-harmless.nl