From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Jan 18 07:01:42 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA12603 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 07:01:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from baloon.mimi.com (sjx-ca126-27.ix.netcom.com [207.92.177.219]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id GAA12503; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 06:59:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@vader.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by baloon.mimi.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA13502; Sun, 18 Jan 1998 06:29:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami) Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 06:29:29 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199801181429.GAA13502@baloon.mimi.com> To: peter@netplex.com.au CC: ache@nagual.pp.ru, perhaps@yes.no, gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <199801180311.LAA07487@spinner.netplex.com.au> (message from Peter Wemm on Sun, 18 Jan 1998 11:10:59 +0800) Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * I feel that it would have been far more appropriate to make a PORT of the * new patch to give the dust some time to settle rather than causing turmoil * in the base system. I personally believe the best thing would be to back * out the new patch ASAP. I agree. Right now there are two types of FreeBSD systems on the world; ones that generates diffs that the new patch can understand, and ones that can't. And the latter outnumbers the former at the ratio of probably something like 50:1. And then there are ports, and people's private patches that will suddenly stop working. IMO, we should back out the new patch in -current now, and wait at least until the next release with the "fixed" cvs before we re-enable it. There is no need to force hardship on our developers. Satoshi