From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 1 17:11:51 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E0016A41F for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:11:51 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from thierry@pompo.net) Received: from graf.pompo.net (graf.pompo.net [81.56.186.139]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660D243D73 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 17:11:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from thierry@pompo.net) Received: by graf.pompo.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id CD6967512; Mon, 1 Aug 2005 19:11:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 19:11:19 +0200 From: Thierry Thomas To: Paul Schmehl Message-ID: <20050801171119.GA18352@graf.pompo.net> Mail-Followup-To: Paul Schmehl , ports@freebsd.org, Sam Lawrance References: <2E1EC4D96E17CB668506B6A5@utd59514.utdallas.edu> <1122910887.789.15.camel@dirk.no.domain> <20050801163712.GA9070@graf.pompo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Face: (hRbQnK~Pt7$ct`!fupO(`y_WL4^-Iwn4@ly-.,[4xC4xc; y=\ipKMNm<1J>lv@PP~7Z<.t KjAnXLs: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.11-STABLE i386 Organization: Kabbale Eros X-PGP: 0xC71405A2 Cc: ports@freebsd.org, Sam Lawrance Subject: Re: PR machine broken? X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:11:51 -0000 Le Lun 1 aoû 05 à 18:44:18 +0200, Paul Schmehl écrivait : > >By the way, this is really an update, and the RCS tag must be preserved. > >You should resubmit it as a patch, because it will be committed this > >way, and we want to keep the history in CVS. > > > OK. Should I resubmit using the PR that was just issued? Yes, please. If it is important, you can compress + uuencode it. > >I had a quick look at this port, and noted something strange: it depends > >on both tcl/tk 83 and 84; is that normal? CATEGORIES are set to tk83... > > > I wasn't sure what to do with that. The port uses tk84 and does not > require tk83, but there *is* no category for tk84 (should one be create?), > so I left that alone. Hmm... you're right! I was sure that tcl84 / tk84 exist. Yet this port depends on itk, which is linked with tk83. > I wasn't sure that I should do patches, because the new port is radically > different from the old port. If I do patches, I'll also have to add text > explaining the changes. Not quite sure how to proceed...... A summary would be sufficient. Regards, -- Th. Thomas.