From owner-freebsd-questions Tue May 13 15:08:29 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA19893 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 13 May 1997 15:08:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ridge.spiritone.com (ridge.spiritone.com [205.139.108.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA19885 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 15:08:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from joes.users.spiritone.com (joes.users.spiritone.com [205.139.111.224]) by ridge.spiritone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id PAA30943 for ; Tue, 13 May 1997 15:04:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from joes@localhost) by joes.users.spiritone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id PAA17606 for questions@freebsd.org; Tue, 13 May 1997 15:07:53 -0700 (PDT) From: Joseph Stein Message-Id: <199705132207.PAA17606@joes.users.spiritone.com> Subject: A comical suggestion for whomever/whenever/whatever... To: questions@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 15:07:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31H (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk How about this? After 2.2 is done, and the majority of development work is on 3.0, how about adding some field to the packages databse (/var/db/pkg) that indicates whether a package/port was added as a package or a port, and then as a part of the 'make world' process, any packages added as ports would be recompiled... Would this be a good thing (my naieve mind says yes), or not, and why? joe