Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 08:19:56 -0700 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/automake Makefile distinfo pkg-plist Message-ID: <20011025081956.G28706@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <3BD7C115.63F75C69@FreeBSD.org>; from sobomax@FreeBSD.org on Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 10:36:53AM %2B0300 References: <XFMail.011024143149.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <3BD7C115.63F75C69@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 25, 2001 at 10:36:53AM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > > Errm, IMO, it would make more sense to do this in the way David > > proposed letting the auto* ports take on the new version and making > > the auto*XX ports use the old one, then just fix any breakages that > > come up. Doesn't bento do automated builds of the packages? Just > > commit the changes, let the builds go through, and fix the errors > > that pop up. We don't have a release real soon, so it should be > > livable. > > Are you going to reply to those zillion "hey port XX broke > because of auto*" PR, which will surely pop up if we do as > you suggest? Maybe. How can anyone say anything until someone makes a list of what breaks. I want to know why so many ports are using autoconf and automake rather than used the included Makefile.in and configure. Are ports that use the GNU build system using autoconf+automake just because they are there? -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011025081956.G28706>