From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 13 15:24:48 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 C1D5016A4CE; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:24:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.soaustin.net (mail.soaustin.net [207.200.4.66]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9781343D1D; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:24:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from linimon@lonesome.com) Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502) id DC626148D7; Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:24:47 -0600 (CST) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 09:24:47 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Linimon X-X-Sender: linimon@pancho To: Mark Russell In-Reply-To: <20041114014750.K60099@juana.isp.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: Kirill Ponomarew cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org cc: portmgr@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADSUP: INDEX[-5] files were removed from CVS. 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: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:24:48 -0000 On Sun, 14 Nov 2004, Mark Russell wrote: > So major changes to 2 stable branches have been discussed in non public > lists and non gives a hoot on the effects on how it effects the general > userbase? Yes, amongst the ports administrators and release engineers. The theory was that it should have no negative effect. If cvsup is deleting the file then that's a problem; adding INDEX to your refuse file is probably the best solution. mcl