Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 23:48:27 -0600 From: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1013492908.5c89ec@mired.org> To: Justin White <just6979@yahoo.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Historical /usr/local Message-ID: <15458.5419.840111.681913@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <8D1FF6A8-1B8C-11D6-8293-000393092F82@yahoo.com> References: <15458.1805.303462.289494@guru.mired.org> <8D1FF6A8-1B8C-11D6-8293-000393092F82@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Justin White <just6979@yahoo.com> types: > On Wednesday, February 6, 2002, at 11:48 , Mike Meyer wrote: > > I claim that this puts ports in the /usr > > category, but that's a different flame war. > the ports "collection" could be considered part of the base. but the > "ports collection" just consists of the makefiles, pkg* info, and the > patches. the ported apps themselves would considered third-party IMO > (for the most part, although if a local patch breaks something, that > would be a freebsd help thing.) The last bit is the critical one - if a ported application breaks, you don't contact the application developers, you contact the port maintainer. Those two may be the same person, but they may not. I even send patches to port maintainers. Not only can they add the patch to the port so it's fixed in FreeBSD, they probably have an existing working relationship with the developer, and are thus more likely to get the patch into the next release. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15458.5419.840111.681913>