From owner-freebsd-ports  Mon Nov 11 03:29:51 1996
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id DAA08877
          for ports-outgoing; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:29:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.11])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA08872
          for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:29:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from baloon.mimi.com (sjx-ca18-20.ix.netcom.com [199.35.223.180]) by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.6.13/8.6.12) with ESMTP id DAA23106; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:29:12 -0800
Received: (from asami@localhost) by baloon.mimi.com (8.8.2/8.6.12) id DAA09657; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:29:10 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 03:29:10 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199611111129.DAA09657@baloon.mimi.com>
To: obrien@NUXI.com
CC: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199611101737.JAA17361@relay.nuxi.com> (obrien@NUXI.com)
Subject: Re: bsd.port.mk patch
From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * Satoshi Asami writes:
 * >  *     MANPAGES=       1/zmrx.1 1/zmtx.1
 * > 
 * > Actually, that's a good idea.  What do people think, is the MAN[1-9LN]
 * > set I sent out earlier or a single MANPAGES variable better?
 * 
 * I still kinda like the single MANPAGES vs. MAN[1-9LN].  But not very
 * strongly.

I prefer MAN[1-9LN] simply because there are many ports out there that
already have similar variables and is easy to convert. ;)  (Take a
look at japanese/Canna/Makefile, for instance.)

But not very strongly, either.  David's idea is very slick and makes
bsd.port.mk slightly shorter too.  What about other people?

Satoshi