Date: 30 May 2000 23:30:53 -0700 From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports projects Message-ID: <vqc3dmzs02q.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: Tim Vanderhoek's message of "Wed, 31 May 2000 01:50:18 -0400" References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10005021057480.36418-100000@pawn.primelocation.net> <vqcvh0wacgg.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <200005071229.FAA29460@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <200005301106.EAA47917@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000530174311.B83316@orange> <vqc8zwrs4z4.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000531015018.A90783@orange>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: Tim Vanderhoek <vanderh@ecf.utoronto.ca>
* That's what it did when I tested it. :-)
That's fine then.
* Looking over it again, now, I don't think the -L symlink test adds
* anything useful.
No big deal either way....
* Since I was responsible for the original tclsh and wish, I can add
* this to the various ports.
Thanks!
* Do you think it's better to use a single copy of it in a shared
* ${PKGDIR} (ie. the way it's done for the INSTALL.tclsh and
* INSTALL.wish scripts), or to put a copy into each tclsh and wish port?
* The use of `portcheckout` is increasing, but I'm not sure it really
* matters in that context. I think I favour a single copy synched with
* INSTALL.(tcl|wi)sh.
I don't mind either way. Just be consistent with INSTALL.{tcl,wi}sh.
Satoshi
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?vqc3dmzs02q.fsf>