From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 12 01:57:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AE4216A4CE; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:57:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fillmore.dyndns.org (port-212-202-50-15.dynamic.qsc.de [212.202.50.15]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE16243D41; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:57:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com) Received: from dhcp-8.local ([172.16.0.8] helo=dhcp-10.local) by fillmore.dyndns.org with esmtp (TLSv1:DES-CBC3-SHA:168) (Exim 4.41 (FreeBSD)) id 1Bv4qG-0004M9-R7; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:57:23 +0200 Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 03:58:58 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v482) To: Ken Smith From: Oliver Eikemeier In-Reply-To: <20040812012909.GA25768@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> Message-Id: <2CD52765-EC03-11D8-887A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: KMail/1.5.9 cc: Doug Barton cc: re@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: Alfred Perlstein cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: Ceri Davies Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add Makefile add.h extract.c futil.c main.c perform.c pkg_add.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/create Makefile create.h main.c perform.c pkg_create.1 pl.c src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/delete Makefile delete.h main.c perform.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 01:57:24 -0000 Ken Smith wrote: > nOn Thu, Aug 12, 2004 at 02:35:33AM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > >> Before I get a million replies to this commit: When anyone from re@ >> thinks it is worth the effort, I will add an -c option to the C >> pkg_version code ASAP. I believe backing this out won't be beneficial >> for -STABLE users, since they'll loose a lot of features (and speed). >> Has anyone on this thread *ever* used that option? > > I would like to see the -c added please. I know it seems like busywork > but we have historically tried to make sure existing semantics don't > change in -stable without a really really really good reason. > Additional > features (and speed ;-) are always welcome/good as long as existing > semantics don't change. If you need any help or want to discuss it > let me know. Ok, I'll write a patch then. -Oliver