Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 18:24:36 -0800 From: "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@NUXI.com> To: Brian Handy <handy@sag.space.lockheed.com> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/mgv Makefile ports/print/mgv/patches patch-ac Message-ID: <19980331182436.07294@nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.3.96.980331180453.4661A-100000@sag.space.lockheed.com>; from Brian Handy on Tue, Mar 31, 1998 at 06:07:39PM -0800 References: <19980331122246.50218@nuxi.com> <Pine.OSF.3.96.980331180453.4661A-100000@sag.space.lockheed.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >Yes I did. But when using the 3.0 Makefile on -STABLE, the about box
> >claims it was built on a 3.0 system which is *obviously* wrong.
>
> I'll try again. Did you break compiling on -CURRENT for a lousy "about"
> box???
Why is it broken on -CURRENT?
After patching the only difference is the text in the "about box".
> Does this seem like a reasonable exchange to you?
Certainly, I don't see the issue with it.
Especially since I had to go clean up -lXm to ${MOTIFLIB} anyway.
> >> Unless you have compelling evidence otherwise, please back the makefile
> >> selection out.
> >
> >1. Ports track -STABLE
> >2. when I looked for a MAINTIER in the Makefile, I didn't see one. So I
> > felt justified in making the change.
>
> ABOUT boxes don't have to track -STABLE :-)
True, but it is misleading.
If I downloaded the package and saw the "about box" say "3.0", I would
have figured I typed "package-current" again when I wanted
"packages-stable". Those running -CURRENT shouldn't expect perfection
from the ports system. We try, but don't guarantee it.
The real fix would be to link *both* makefiles to ${WRKSRC} and set
${MAKEFILE} depending on the value of
sysctl -n kern.osreldate | sed -e '/.....$$/s///'
--
-- David (obrien@NUXI.ucdavis.edu -or- obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980331182436.07294>