From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 25 16:43:23 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BC316A41C for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 16:43:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsam@bsam.ru) Received: from bsam.ru (gw.ipt.ru [80.253.10.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 609E143D1D for ; Wed, 25 May 2005 16:43:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsam@bsam.ru) Received: from bsam by bsam.ru with local (Exim 4.30; FreeBSD) id 1Dayzd-0000c7-1q; Wed, 25 May 2005 20:44:29 +0400 To: virenp@mail.utexas.edu References: <3578.146.6.135.76.1116702794.squirrel@mail.cm.utexas.edu> <20648162@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <43618.146.6.178.5.1117033514.squirrel@mail.cm.utexas.edu> <1117034205.1821.28.camel@dirk.no.domain> <41326.146.6.178.5.1117038317.squirrel@mail.cm.utexas.edu> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 20:44:29 +0400 In-Reply-To: <41326.146.6.178.5.1117038317.squirrel@mail.cm.utexas.edu> (Viren Patel's message of "Wed, 25 May 2005 11:25:17 -0500 (CDT)") Message-ID: <20596114@srv.sem.ipt.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: "Boris B. Samorodov" Cc: Sam Lawrance , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Aide port broken in 5.4? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 16:43:23 -0000 On Wed, 25 May 2005 11:25:17 -0500 (CDT) Viren Patel wrote: > pkg_info on the 5.3 system says it's Aide-0.10_1. The > Makefile says is 0.10_1. The Makefiles on both are the > same except for the Makefile version number and the BROKEN > line in the 5.4. Running "aide --version" on both 5.3 and > 5.4 reports 0.10. So I am not sure what's going on here. As I understand part 5.2.2.1 "PORT REVISION" of the Porter's Handbook if a port got to have marked as BROKEN, there is no reason to change the port_revision_number. And the same is when the port is got to be unmarked. > Viren WBR -- bsam