Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 07:58:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Tim Vanderhoek <hoek@hwcn.org> To: itojun@itojun.org Cc: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/4326 Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.970820074231.17855B-100000@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca> In-Reply-To: <6224.872066374@itojun.csl.sony.co.jp>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 20 Aug 1997 itojun@itojun.org wrote: > >waste our time because he can't be bothered to read the instructions > >(it has been stated over and over that you need to update some stuff > >if you are going to run the latest ports on a release system) or at > >least take a look at the Makefile in question before submitting a > >bogus PR. > > anyway, there should be a way to prevent bogus PRs. > > how about one of the followings: > - timestamping (already rejected yesterday, I remember) That was a fairly simplistic and not-thought-out timestamping suggestion. Whoever suggested it should learn to think through his/her ideas before wasting everyone's time with them. A better timestamping system would compare RCS strings, but the general problem is that there's no way to catch the case where a port upgraded but bsd.port.mk isn't touched. If one is willing to let this case slide, then it could work... After that, an automated numbering system that updates each port's pkg/OLDEST_WORKING_MK everytime bsd.port.mk is changed is probably the next solution. Ugh. Yuck. -- Outnumbered? Maybe. Outspoken? Never! tIM...HOEk
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.3.96.970820074231.17855B-100000>