From owner-cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 13 08:10:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B3FD16A4DF; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 08:10:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 971A043D5C; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 08:10:25 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id 436461472F; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:10:24 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 10:10:24 -0500 (CDT) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" In-Reply-To: <20040413140137.GG84087@madman.celabo.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: Mark Linimon cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/metamail Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the ports tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 15:10:30 -0000 > Heh, my message was meant to *support* the removal of this port, not > prevent it :-) What it meant was that I had not done all my research. When going through the distfile survey, there are so many entries that it's possible to forget to double-check with INDEX. Either this port _and_ all its dependants of need to be given an expiration date, or none of them do, and the status quo ante is that none of them did. I'm going to let doing the research to figure out if anyone is using any of them just be on the "to get around to" list for now. mcl