Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:56:49 +0100 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> To: Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Where is FreeBSD going? Message-ID: <20040109145649.GA5994@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> In-Reply-To: <20040109133001.GK30356@toxic.magnesium.net> References: <3FFC03E5.7010305@iconoplex.co.uk> <200401071429.i07ETZMI068819@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20040107200838.GD86935@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040108071730.GA53328@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040108173642.GS54743@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040109003630.GA63979@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040109095246.GT54743@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040109133001.GK30356@toxic.magnesium.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# adamw@FreeBSD.org / 2004-01-09 08:30:01 -0500:
> >> (01.09.2004 @ 0452 PST): Roman Neuhauser said, in 1.9K: <<
> > # kris@obsecurity.org / 2004-01-08 16:36:30 -0800:
> > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 06:36:42PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > > > That might be technically true, but the precise semantics of
> > > > "(semi-)freeze" aren't as widely known as you seem to think.
> > > > E. g. yesterday or today I received an email from a committer in
> > > > response to my two mails to ports@ (the first urging a repocopy
> > > > requested in a PR some time ago, the other retracting the request
> > > > because of the freeze) saying (paraphrased) "to my surprise I was
> > > > told repocopies are allowed during freeze". Some people just prefer
> > > > to err on the safe side.
> > >
> > > Repo-copies are not allowed during the freeze, but are any other time.
> >
> > ok, so someone (at least two people) out there is confused about
> > this, and this only further proves my statement about the uncertainty.
>
> Messages stating what Kris said are sent out at the beginning of every
> freeze.
But it wouldn't hurt if this info was part of
a) porters-handbook
b) freebsd-releng with a pointer from porters-handbook
right?
> > > > Also, I would have thought the Porter's handbook would e. g.
> > > > contain info on preventing installation of .la files (I
> > > > gathered from the ports@ list that they shouldn't be
> > > > installed), isn't this lack quite
> > > > obvious?
> > >
> > > No, please raise this on the ports list.
> >
> > ok, cc'd to ports, Mail-Followup-To set.
>
> A fix for this is given in
> http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/porting.html
> in the section entitled "Libtool Issues."
www.freebsd.org/gnome/ is pehaps the last place I would be looking
in search for this. doesn't the para belong in porters-handbook?
--
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message. see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040109145649.GA5994>