From owner-cvs-ports  Fri May 12 20:32:09 1995
Return-Path: cvs-ports-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id UAA24008
          for cvs-ports-outgoing; Fri, 12 May 1995 20:32:09 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id UAA23991
          ; Fri, 12 May 1995 20:32:03 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) id UAA00925; Fri, 12 May 1995 20:31:55 -0700
Date: Fri, 12 May 1995 20:31:55 -0700
Message-Id: <199505130331.UAA00925@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr
CC: CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-ports@freefall.cdrom.com
In-reply-to: <9505130428.AA28066@cabri.obs-besancon.fr> (jmz@cabri.obs-besancon.fr)
Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/lang Makefile
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=)
Sender: cvs-ports-owner@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I did not this to fix a problem. There is already an EXEC_DEPENDS in
 * the makefile. It seemed more logical to have the list in the same
 * order as the order in which ports will be build.  

Oh, I see.  Well, if there is already an EXEC_DEPENDS in the Makefile,
I don't see any reason why you want to put things in non-alphabetical
order in the parent Makefile.  It doesn't fix anything, and it will
just make it harder to find it.

Satoshi