From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Jun 10 20:03:53 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA29959 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:03:53 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA29916; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:03:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mph@FreeBSD.org) From: Matthew Hunt Received: (from mph@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.5) id UAA12712; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 20:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199806110303.UAA12712@freefall.freebsd.org> To: ve@sci.fi, mph@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG, mph@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/6866 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Synopsis: Upgrade of fetchmail to version 4.4.9 State-Changed-From-To: open-feedback State-Changed-By: mph State-Changed-When: Wed Jun 10 22:58:28 EDT 1998 State-Changed-Why: I am concerned about adding the RUN_DEPENDS for python, considering that it is only necessary for the configuration utility, and not for the operation of fetchmail itself. This dependency forces the user to have Python, Tk80, and X11 installed, which seems a little excessive. I have sent an email to freebsd-ports (CC'd to you) to discuss whether the RUN_DEPENDS is the best way to handle thiis new utility. Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-ports->mph Responsible-Changed-By: mph Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Jun 10 22:58:28 EDT 1998 Responsible-Changed-Why: I will commit this port, when there is a consensus about the Python issue. Or as close to a consensus as we get... To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message