From owner-freebsd-ports  Fri Dec 12 04:11:54 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA15006
          for ports-outgoing; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 04:11:54 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports)
Received: from messiah.cableinet.net (messiah.cableinet.net [194.117.157.68])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id EAA14998
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 04:11:48 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from i.vaudrey@bigfoot.com)
Received: (qmail 10386 invoked from network); 12 Dec 1997 12:10:30 -0000
Received: from lions.cableinet.net (193.38.113.5)
  by messiah with SMTP; 12 Dec 1997 12:10:30 -0000
Received: from nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk (usr160-cro.cableinet.co.uk [194.117.149.170]) by lions.cableinet.net (950413.SGI.8.6.12/951211.SGI) via SMTP id KAA11186; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:26:32 GMT
Received: by nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk with Microsoft Mail
	id <01BD06E8.7089CBA0@nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk>; Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:26:42 -0000
Message-ID: <01BD06E8.7089CBA0@nemkoltd.nildram.co.uk>
From: Ian Vaudrey <i.vaudrey@bigfoot.com>
To: "'Satoshi Asami'" <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>
Cc: "ports@freebsd.org" <ports@freebsd.org>
Subject: RE: Porting questions
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 1997 10:24:16 -0000
Encoding: 29 TEXT
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On 11 December 1997 23:29, Satoshi Asami wrote:
> It doesn't matter whether they are copied or used directly.  I know
> they aren't "documents" to be looked at per se, but directly under
> "share" is getting a little crowded I'd prefer to bend the rules
> slightly to squeeze it under "share/doc".  But really, either "share"
> or "share/doc" is fine for me.

I've used share/vilearn. This avoids a warning from portlint about
not respecting NOPORTDOCS if share/doc/vilearn is used . I didn't
want to put off whoever reviews the port!

>  * It was also suggested to me that we could display the message once,
>  * at install time, rather than at the end of every vilearn session. Do
>  * you think that would honour the authors' intentions, without bugging
>  * everyone to death?
> 
> I guess that's fine too.  It's up to you.

It turned out to be a non-issue. I found a slightly more recent
version of the distribution and the authors have removed the
message.

Thanks for your assistance.

> 
> Satoshi
> 

 - Ian