Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 10 Nov 1996 13:31:35 -0800 (PST)
From:      Dave Babler <dbabler@Rigel.orionsys.com>
To:        Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: wwwcount-2.3
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.95.961110132533.15944A-100000@Rigel.orionsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.95.961109224225.8618B-100000@packet.eng.umd.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Sat, 9 Nov 1996, Chuck Robey wrote:
> 
> I've checked, and if everyone running 2.1 and 2.1.5 would grab a copy of
> current's bsd.port.mk, it has no negative impact, and will eliminate the
> majority of build failures for new ports.  There are a small subset of
> ports that depend on differences in /usr/include and whatnot, but that's a
> real small subset.
> 
> Good Advice: update your bsd.port.mk file in /usr/share/mk.
> 
I'm running 2.1.5-stable and just grabbed the bsd.port.mk file for
-current. I'd had problems before making the slang-lynx (2.6) port and was
informed that the ports collection now only applied to -current. The mak
breaks in exactly the same place as it used to - it cannot apply any of
the patches.

Is this port of lynx one of the real small subset, or is something else
hosed here?

-Dave




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.95.961110132533.15944A-100000>