Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      27 Nov 1999 22:26:25 +1100
From:      asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami)
To:        Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>
Cc:        ports@FreeBSD.org, Gary Jennejohn <garyj@muc.de>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: ports/editors/xemacs21 Makefile ports/editors/xemacs21/pkg PLIST
Message-ID:  <vqc1z9ckwf2.fsf@bubble.didi.com>
In-Reply-To: Sheldon Hearn's message of "Thu, 18 Nov 1999 09:03:51 %2B0200"
References:  <13027.942908631@axl.noc.iafrica.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
 * From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za>

 * >-@dirrm lib/xemacs
 * >+@unexec rmdir %D/lib/xemacs 2>/dev/null || true

 * I'm raising this here because I'd like to know whether this sort of
 * thing (silencing package-related warnings for the sake of aesthetics)
 * has become standard practice, or whether it's a habit a few people have
 * gotten into that should be broken. :-)

It's standard practice, even recommended in the handbook. :)

However, as you said, it is not a good idea to silence a warning just
for the sake of it; it should be used only when it is known which
other port is causing this and it is not a problem that the warning
appeared (and thus can be safely silenced).

-PW


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?vqc1z9ckwf2.fsf>