From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 26 17:00:04 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC6E1065698 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DCA68FC27 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n9QH04QQ052386 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id n9QH044e052385; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 GMT Message-Id: <200910261700.n9QH044e052385@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Borja Marcos Cc: Subject: Re: ports/121050: New port: sysutils/heartbeat2 Linux High-Availability Daemon X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Borja Marcos List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:00:04 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/121050; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Borja Marcos To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, ports@encarnate.com Cc: Subject: Re: ports/121050: New port: sysutils/heartbeat2 Linux High-Availability Daemon Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:58:47 +0100 Seems that some configurations don't work. Is there a sound reason to drop heartbeat 1.x and force an upgrade to 2.x? I've seen a couple of services due to this. The operator assumed that "heartbeat" was the same. As both are quite different, there should be different ports for both, in my opinion. Borja.