Date: Sun, 12 Jul 1998 10:33:07 +0400 From: =?koi8-r?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@FreeBSD.ORG>, ady@warpnet.ro Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Arrangements for new port of Pine 4.00 Message-ID: <19980712103307.A22942@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <199807120117.KAA13167@bubble.didi.com>; from asami@FreeBSD.ORG on Sun, Jul 12, 1998 at 10:17:19AM %2B0900 References: <Pine.BSF.4.00.9807110309290.28018-100000@scouter.warpnet.ro> <199807120117.KAA13167@bubble.didi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jul 12, 1998 at 10:17:19AM +0900, Satoshi Asami wrote: > * Is the 'mail/pine3' : 'mail/pine4' scheme OK with you ? Please announce > * me when you have finished the repository copy. > * > * Pine 3.96 -> mail/pine -> mail/pine3 > * Pine 4.00 --------------> mail/pine4 > > Yes, that's ok. (Andrey, we usually err on the side of cautiosness > when we upgrade major ports like this. We can always delete pine3 if > pine4 proves to be stable enough.) > > I just did a repository copy. Please do the rest. Don't forgot to > set NO_LATEST_LINK in pine4/Makefile. Are we going to have two pine4 ports? As port maintainer I plan to upgrade to 4.00 as I find time. It results with two pine4 ports. Submitted pine4 port is deadly broken just because essential pine3.96 patches are dropped out so I not reccomed to use it in anycase. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/ MTH/SH/HE S-- W-- N+ PEC>+ D A a++ C G>+ QH+(++) 666+>++ Y 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?19980712103307.A22942>