From owner-freebsd-stable  Sat Aug  2 09:25:27 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA29897
          for stable-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 09:25:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ady.warp.starnets.ro (ady.warp.starnets.ro [193.226.124.33])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA29887;
          Sat, 2 Aug 1997 09:25:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (ady@localhost)
	by ady.warp.starnets.ro (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA05353;
	Sat, 2 Aug 1997 19:22:26 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 19:22:26 +0300 (EEST)
From: Penisoara Adrian <ady@warp.starnets.ro>
To: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
cc: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu>, andreas@klemm.gtn.com,
        ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued
In-Reply-To: <199708021013.TAA09852@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.970802191206.5218A-100000@ady.warp.starnets.ro>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Michael Smith wrote:

> Ports should have less (or no) "official" support on -current.  If you
> are running -current, you should be able to take care of yourself.

  Well, what about folks running 3.0-current for SMP reasons and that have
not so much ideea about UN*X/FreeBSD hacking ? By chance it happens that
myself too I am in the same position...

> Naturally, merging fixes to help them run on -current is desirable, as
> it will make the cutover at the next major upgrade easier.

  Not only that, the ports should be buildable on every version of
FreeBSD, if possible; it comes to my mind something like GNU's autoconfig
scripts...
  I'd really like to see *one* single ports tree, buildable on every
FreeBSD version; this might be hard, I know, but I think it well worths
working on it.

  Ady (@warp.starnets.ro)