From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Jun 30 2:30: 7 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D839537C40C for ; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 02:30:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.9.3/8.9.2) id CAA77379; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 02:30:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 02:30:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006300930.CAA77379@freefall.freebsd.org> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Cc: From: Trevor Johnson Subject: Re: ports/19594: update port: qrash Reply-To: Trevor Johnson Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org The following reply was made to PR ports/19594; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Trevor Johnson To: Maxim Sobolev Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/19594: update port: qrash Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 05:24:13 -0400 (EDT) > Why we should to? AFAIK, SDL is known not to work with FeeBSD releases < 4.0, so You're the maintainer of the sdl and sdl-ports ports. Why haven't you added BROKEN= lines to them so everyone will know this? > if we will update the port to use SDL instead of plain X11 we will loose > portability while would gain little or nothing. The SDL version doesn't ask the user about sound but rather tries to detect whether it's available. Also the video looks a little smoother to me. It seems I wasted my time though. :( Please close this PR. -- Trevor Johnson http://jpj.net/~trevor/gpgkey.txt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message