From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Mar  5 23:06:14 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id XAA24945
          for ports-outgoing; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:06:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (time.cdrom.com [192.216.222.226])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id XAA24938
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:06:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.7.4/8.6.9) with SMTP id XAA24692; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 23:06:07 -0800 (PST)
To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
cc: ports@freebsd.org, jfieber@grendel.csc.smith.edu
Subject: Re: Dependencies in the INDEX? Whine.. 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 05 Mar 1996 22:55:02 PST."
             <199603060655.WAA15239@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> 
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 1996 23:06:06 -0800
Message-ID: <24689.826095966@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> By the way, I was wondering if adding fetch/build dependencies (as
> a separate field, of course) might be worthwhile too.  This would be
> more interesting for use on the web page, as we've been hearing from
> the users "hey I downloaded the port, why didn't you tell me that I
> needed something else?".

Sure, why not?  Just so long as the runtime depends are separate,
I'm fine with it!

					Jordan