Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 15:12:51 -0700 (PDT) From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: fenner@parc.xerox.com Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: MASTER_SITES= Message-ID: <199705302212.PAA25772@vader.cs.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <97May28.194008pdt.177489@crevenia.parc.xerox.com> (message from Bill Fenner on Wed, 28 May 1997 19:39:56 PDT)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* For ports that we acknowledge are out of date and accept that the * master site no longer has the version of the files that we want (e.g. * hylafax, popclient), does it make sense to put an empty MASTER_SITES= * in the port Makefile? This prevents the timeout or failed attempt to * get a file that we know for sure isn't going to get fetched, and forces * a fallback to the FreeBSD distfiles backup. * * If the port does eventually get upgraded, the old MASTER_SITES= can be * resurrected from the CVS history if needed. I think this is fine, except I would rather keep it as a comment alongside the empty definition. That would be much easier for people who want to look around. Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705302212.PAA25772>