From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 4 07:24:50 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377E416A4CE for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 07:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (comp.chem.msu.su [158.250.32.97]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C649543D45 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 07:24:46 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: from comp.chem.msu.su (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i54EOfca025815 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 18:24:41 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar@comp.chem.msu.su) Received: (from yar@localhost) by comp.chem.msu.su (8.12.9p2/8.12.9/Submit) id i54EOekN025814 for ports@freebsd.org; Fri, 4 Jun 2004 18:24:40 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from yar) Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 18:24:40 +0400 From: Yar Tikhiy To: ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040604142439.GA25434@comp.chem.msu.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: NO_CDROM and NO_PACKAGE set together? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 14:24:50 -0000 Hi there, Is it all right to set both NO_CDROM and NO_PACKAGE for a port to indicate that mirroring the original distfiles is the only thing allowed by the license? The comments at the top of bsd.port.mk, and the Porter's Handbook seem to imply that these variables are mutually exclusive. Thanks! -- Yar