From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 8 18:31:08 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D9216A420; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 18:31:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gad@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp3.server.rpi.edu (smtp3.server.rpi.edu [128.113.2.3]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D455743D6D; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 18:31:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gad@FreeBSD.org) Received: from [128.113.24.47] (gilead.netel.rpi.edu [128.113.24.47]) by smtp3.server.rpi.edu (8.13.0/8.13.0) with ESMTP id k28IV1FJ011532; Wed, 8 Mar 2006 13:31:03 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <20060308.085928.120042761.imp@bsdimp.com> References: <20060308071705.GJ62485@garage.freebsd.pl> <86ek1dwfa6.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060308150647.GG737@garage.freebsd.pl> <20060308.085928.120042761.imp@bsdimp.com> Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 13:31:01 -0500 To: "M. Warner Losh" , pjd@FreeBSD.org From: Garance A Drosehn Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-CanItPRO-Stream: default X-RPI-SA-Score: undef - spam-scanning disabled X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . canit . ca) on 128.113.2.3 Cc: des@des.no, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/tools/regression/lib/libc/resolv Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2006 18:31:08 -0000 At 8:59 AM -0700 3/8/06, M. Warner Losh wrote: >In message: <20060308150647.GG737@garage.freebsd.pl> > Pawel Jakub Dawidek writes: >: On Wed, Mar 08, 2006, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: >: +> >: +> Since we abandoned MAN[1-9]. The fact that many old Makefiles >: +> still use NO_MAN doesn't make it right; NO_MAN is a user knob, >: +> not a Makefile knob (same distinction as between WITH_FOO and >: +> USE_FOO in the ports tree). >: >: Fair enough. Maybe we should fix NO_MAN= uses, so it doesn't >: create confusion? > >Seems like a reasonable thing to do. Cut and paste copying >of bad examples is a big source of bogusness in our tree... If we fix this in some makefiles in -current, should we also (eventually) MFC the changes back into RELENG_6? Or is it only an issue for -current? -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu Senior Systems Programmer or gad@FreeBSD.org Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; Troy, NY; USA