From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 27 04:38:49 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF326106566B; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:38:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gabor@kovesdan.org) Received: from server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [87.229.73.95]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 623FE8FC08; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:38:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server.mypc.hu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B013D14DAAFE; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:38:48 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at server.mypc.hu Received: from server.mypc.hu ([127.0.0.1]) by server.mypc.hu (server.mypc.hu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id Q5JgoPpPwQF8; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:38:46 +0100 (CET) Received: from [113.199.187.218] (unknown [113.199.187.218]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by server.mypc.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 77E2B14DAAF7; Sat, 27 Mar 2010 05:38:45 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4BAD8BCF.7080800@kovesdan.org> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 10:23:39 +0545 From: Gabor Kovesdan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Linimon References: <201003261123.o2QBNGZT002851@repoman.freebsd.org> <4BACAE9B.4060800@kovesdan.org> <20100326233439.GA28984@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <20100326233439.GA28984@lonesome.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/archivers/rar Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: **OBSOLETE** CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 04:38:49 -0000 On 27/03/2010 5:19, Mark Linimon wrote: > I guess I've erred on the side of not notifying people about breakages on > systems that we don't have tinderboxen for, just to avoid filling up > people's mailboxes. What do other people think? Am I making a mistake? > > (Yes, in a perfect world we have tinderboxen for these ...) > > Ah, ok, that's reasonable, I wouldn't be able to test them at all. I just wondered why I hadn't got a notification. Gabor