Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 22:40:55 +0900 From: Motoyuki Konno <motoyuki@bsdclub.org> To: Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg> Cc: Motoyuki Konno <motoyuki@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/imake-4/scripts configure Message-ID: <200011301340.eAUDetc82232@sakura.mk.bsdclub.org> References: <200011291208.eATC8K274350@freefall.freebsd.org> <20001130150829.A9269@ringworld.oblivion.bg>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Add Cc: ports
Peter Pentchev <roam@orbitel.bg>wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 04:08:20AM -0800, Motoyuki Konno wrote:
> > motoyuki 2000/11/29 04:08:20 PST
> >
> > Modified files:
> > devel/imake-4/scripts configure
> > Log:
> > Add "#define BuildAoutLibraries ${BuildAoutLibraries}".
> >
> > This variable is declared in port Makefile.
> >
> > Submitted by: motoyuki
> > Reviewed by: maintainer
> > Reference: [ports-jp 10459],[ports-jp 10464]
> >
> > Revision Changes Path
> > 1.4 +3 -0 ports/devel/imake-4/scripts/configure
>
> Does this warrant a PORTREVISION bump?
Hmm. The default value of ${BuildAoutLibraries} is "NO" (see imake
config file which will be installed into /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/config).
and port Makefil). So, my commit does NOT change the behaviour of
imake-4 package.
# If you build this port with "make BuildAoutLibraries=YES package",
# the package will differ.
So, I think PORTREVISION bump is not needed. Is my idea wrong?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Motoyuki Konno motoyuki@bsdclub.org (Home)
motoyuki@FreeBSD.ORG (FreeBSD Project)
http://www.freebsd.org/~motoyuki/ (WWW)
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011301340.eAUDetc82232>