Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 14:09:50 +0000 From: David Taylor <davidt@yadt.co.uk> To: David Syphers <dsyphers@u.washington.edu> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: win32-codecs question ... Message-ID: <20070112140950.GA71126@outcold.yadt.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <200701042129.00139.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> References: <438465.16988.qm@web32710.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <200701041327.52134.dsyphers@u.washington.edu> <200701041339.36221.fcash@ocis.net> <200701042129.00139.dsyphers@u.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007, David Syphers wrote: > On Thursday 04 January 2007 13:39, Freddie Cash wrote: > > If a port supports the OPTION framework, then the first time you run make [snip] > > And a mention of it in /usr/ports/UPDATING > > and/or /usr/ports/CHANGES. > > Now, this I read. And no, it's not documented there. The only mentions in > UPDATING are under postfix entries, and I don't use postfix. The entries in > CHANGES wouldn't catch your eye unless you knew what you were looking for - > everything assumes prior knowledge of what OPTIONS is and what it implies. The third entry in CHANGES mentions it in passing. It appears to have been introduced before the CHANGES file started. -- David Taylor
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070112140950.GA71126>