Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 16:57:19 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <TrimYourCc@NUXI.com> To: Cyrille Lefevre <clefevre@citeweb.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Update port: sysutils/gtar - 1.13.19 Message-ID: <20010207165719.G70586@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <y9vpx39k.fsf@gits.dyndns.org>; from clefevre@citeweb.net on Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 02:49:43AM %2B0100 References: <20010129173636.A49697@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <200101292045.f0TKj6q94508@gits.dyndns.org> <20010131015608.A25609@kemoauc.mips.inka.de> <y9vpx39k.fsf@gits.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 02:49:43AM +0100, Cyrille Lefevre wrote: > > There's a total of... find... grep... seven ports that have an > > alpha.gnu.org master site. That's hardly worth an entry in > > bsd.sites.mk. > > in fact, there are some other ports which may be upgraded from > alpha.gnu.org and some added, such as findutils, paxutils, gnubg, > etc. I *highly* caution people from using the GNU "alpha" versions just because they exist. I also would hate to see a proliferation of "-devel" ports just because they exist. A port should use the "best" distfile available. In the gtar case, I understand why the "alpha" version is being used. I've had discussions with the GNU maintainer, and it is better than the last [so called] released version. But in other cases, a port should just use the released version, not an "alpha" version just because it is "sexy".... Is the alpha version of findutils really any better than the released version? Those versions are on alpha.gnu.org for a _reason_. > also, I'm thinking about making these ports as -devel as gtar should Make them -alpha, or -snapshot please. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010207165719.G70586>