Date: 05 May 2000 08:25:19 -0700 From: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> Cc: Philip Hallstrom <philip@adhesivemedia.com>, Chris Piazza <cpiazza@jaxon.net>, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FYI: Missing DISTNAME for netpbm 8.4... Message-ID: <vqcem7h3tpc.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: Will Andrews's message of "Tue, 2 May 2000 07:59:05 -0400" References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005011709050.42183-100000@illiad.adhesivemedia.com> <vqcya5tbbjp.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> <20000502075905.E392@argon.blackdawn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> * Isn't this already accomplished by the PORTMKVERSION variable (Which * really shouldn't be limited to forcing people to use "upgrade packages" * IMO) ? No, it's the opposite. PORTMKVERSION can only detect (part of) the system being too old compared to bsd.port.mk. The problem we have is bsd.port.mk being too old compared to (part of) the ports tree. Satoshi 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?vqcem7h3tpc.fsf>