From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Jul 19 9:16:24 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mercury.mich.com (mercury.mich.com [64.79.64.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A85637C00F; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 09:16:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from will@almanac.yi.org) Received: from argon.gryphonsoft.com (pm006-027.dialup.bignet.net [64.79.81.11]) by mercury.mich.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA12993; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:15:02 -0400 Received: by argon.gryphonsoft.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D88FC19C0; Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:13:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:13:19 -0400 From: Will Andrews To: Alexander Langer Cc: Bill Fumerola , Maxim Sobolev , ports@FreeBSD.ORG, asami@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Patches rules (Was: Re: cvs commit: ports/mail/qpopper Makefile ports/mail/qpopper/patchespatch-manpages ports/mail/qpopper/pkg MESSAGE PLISTports/mail/qpopper/scripts pre-install) Message-ID: <20000719121319.A11216@argon.gryphonsoft.com> References: <200007190731.AAA03974@freefall.freebsd.org> <39756134.DC76C6B7@FreeBSD.org> <20000719100926.A14534@cichlids.cichlids.com> <397563F6.637203D4@FreeBSD.org> <20000719103430.A16056@cichlids.cichlids.com> <3975691E.2E57CE99@FreeBSD.org> <20000719105126.A16553@cichlids.cichlids.com> <39757581.ACC6B77C@FreeBSD.org> <20000719054342.S51462@jade.chc-chimes.com> <20000719120626.A36043@cichlids.cichlids.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i In-Reply-To: <20000719120626.A36043@cichlids.cichlids.com>; from alex@FreeBSD.ORG on Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 12:06:26PM +0200 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, Jul 19, 2000 at 12:06:26PM +0200, Alexander Langer wrote: > Hmm. Funny, that this whole thing came up just because Maxim disliked > my qpopper change. The same thing happened when David O'Brien decided he didn't like the "Version required" line in his ports and removed them, before asking for consensus on -ports. Please conform to the rules as they are stated in the documentation until you get a consensus on -ports, and you make Satoshi agree to your changes. That said, I do agree that it seems the method you mentioned is more efficient (no longer have to head -2 patches/*-* to find out what patch patches which file), but what about conflicting files? I.e. src/Makefile.in and po/Makefile.in. Do we only use src_Makefile.in and po_Makefile.in in such cases, or do we force all patches to have the directories prepended? Just some thoughts; they seem like a good way to start a discussion on the topic. Regards, -- Will Andrews GCS/E/S @d- s+:+>+:- a--->+++ C++ UB++++ P+ L- E--- W+++ !N !o ?K w--- ?O M+ V-- PS+ PE++ Y+ PGP+>+++ t++ 5 X++ R+ tv+ b++>++++ DI+++ D+ G++>+++ e->++++ h! r-->+++ y? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message