Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2011 08:18:14 -0500 From: Greg Larkin <glarkin@FreeBSD.org> To: Mikhail Teterin <mi@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/websh Makefile Message-ID: <4D63B796.3080406@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <201102220418.p1M4Idj6063729@repoman.freebsd.org> References: <201102220418.p1M4Idj6063729@repoman.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 2/21/11 11:18 PM, Mikhail Teterin wrote: > mi 2011-02-22 04:18:39 UTC > > FreeBSD ports repository > > Modified files: > www/websh Makefile > Log: > The PORTREVISION bump was not warranted -- the pre-built package was not > affected by the ohauer's change, which only affected the post-install > target. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.17 +1 -1 ports/www/websh/Makefile Is it a good idea to decrement PORTREVISION after the previous commit has been in the tree for some number of hours? Won't that mess up portsnap or some other auto-building process, not to mention pkg_version, etc.? - -Greg - -- Greg Larkin http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code. http://twitter.com/sourcehosting/ - Follow me, follow you -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1jt5UACgkQ0sRouByUApCqYgCgw4RxNVvBDX+RPnVeB0/o56y4 ZdAAoM3mIaaYsBc9tDmqvEoXXZj4+m6u =7dPd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D63B796.3080406>