From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Nov 21 18:48: 3 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from c418236-a.clmba1.mo.home.com (c418236-a.clmba1.mo.home.com [24.12.203.134]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71F4337B405 for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 18:48:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from babylon.merseine.nu (babylon [192.168.1.5]) by c418236-a.clmba1.mo.home.com (8.11.6/8.11.5) with ESMTP id fAM2m0I17566; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:48:00 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ishmael@home.com) Received: (from ishmael@localhost) by babylon.merseine.nu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id fAM2m0k08683; Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:48:00 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ishmael) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 20:47:59 -0600 From: Jeremy Norris To: Pete Fritchman Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: $FreeBSD$ in pkg-plist (was Re: ports/32037: New port: pm-lib) Message-ID: <20011122024759.GA8664@babylon.merseine.nu> References: <200111190520.fAJ5K2t67168@freefall.freebsd.org> <20011119083417.C81774@databits.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20011119083417.C81774@databits.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.2i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Nov 19, 2001 at 08:34:17AM -0500, Pete Fritchman wrote: > ++ 18/11/01 21:20 -0800 - Jeremy Norris: > | Please use this shar instead of original (adds $FreeBSD$ to pkg-plist). > > Is this really necessary? It isn't documented anywhere and portlint > doesn't check for it. Most ports do not have this, while just a few do. > > Personally, I don't see any need for it. A few people I have talked to > tend to agree with me, too. So can we come up with a policy about this > and be consistent? > I see no harm in it being added. I believe OpenBSD does it in all of their ports. What does portmgr think? Jeremy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message