Date: 31 Oct 2002 20:38:32 +0100 From: Jan.Stocker@t-online.de (Jan Stocker) To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/44760: Tuxpuck update to 0.8.1 Message-ID: <1036093113.635.7.camel@twoflower> In-Reply-To: <200210310031.g9V0VFe0028188@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200210310031.g9V0VFe0028188@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What is the actual common practice for naming patch files in sub dirs? After we've changed from the numbered patches to one-file-named-patches we used :: as a separator. OO uses for the last few updates + as a separator, so i thought the convention had been changed and i missed it. So i used + and Adam changed it to :: ..... Jan On Thu, 2002-10-31 at 01:31, Adam Weinberger wrote: > Synopsis: Tuxpuck update to 0.8.1 > > State-Changed-From-To: open->closed > State-Changed-By: adamw > State-Changed-When: Wed Oct 30 16:30:48 PST 2002 > State-Changed-Why: > Committed, with minor revisions. Thanks! > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=44760 > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1036093113.635.7.camel>