From owner-freebsd-ports  Tue Oct  3 05:47:30 1995
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id FAA28203
          for ports-outgoing; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:47:30 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id FAA28198
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:47:28 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.12/8.6.9) id FAA07788; Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:47:16 -0700
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 05:47:16 -0700
Message-Id: <199510031247.FAA07788@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: gena@NetVision.net.il
CC: A.C.P.M.Kalker@student.utwente.nl, ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <XFMail.951003083249.gena@NetVision.net.il> (message from Gennady Sorokopud on Tue, 3 Oct 1995 10:32:52 +0200)
Subject: Re: Building x11/xforms-0.75: Library name conflict
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

 * Umm..i didn't do that because i've seen some discussion going on
 * about libforms.* in /usr/lib , and i understood that this libary
 * is on it's way out of the tree.
 * 
 * If not i'll change the ports..

That's true, but at least it's still in there.  Also, it has grabbed
"the name" first, so name conflicts should be resolved in its favor
even if it is moved out to ports.  Finally, it's not going to be
erased on systems that already have them even if they are removed from 
our main src tree, so we really have no choice but to rename xforms. :)

Satoshi