From owner-freebsd-ports  Sun Jul 30 19:06:32 1995
Return-Path: ports-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) id TAA01614
          for ports-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 1995 19:06:32 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.11/8.6.6) with ESMTP id TAA01607
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 30 Jul 1995 19:06:27 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) id TAA02634; Sun, 30 Jul 1995 19:06:01 -0700
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 1995 19:06:01 -0700
Message-Id: <199507310206.TAA02634@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: kelly@fsl.noaa.gov
CC: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <9507301733.AA05948@emu.fsl.noaa.gov> (kelly@fsl.noaa.gov)
Subject: Re: Tcl 7.4 / Tk 4.0 Ports
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: ports-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 * According to the various README-style files, *both* tcl7.4 and tk4.0
 * are somewhat incompatible with scripts written for tcl7.3 and tk4.0.
 * 
 * In my own repertoire of scripts, all of my tcl-only scripts work fine
 * with tcl7.4.  It's a different story with my tk4.0 scripts, though.

Ok, seems like it's too dangerous to lose tcl-7.3, and we definitely
can't erase tk-3.6.  Now, what should we do?

tk-4.0 should probably go in to a new directory "tk4", should we do
the same thing for "tcl74"?  Ugh....

Why didn't they increase the *major* version number anyway, if they
are backward incompatible.... :<

Satoshi