Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2006 18:26:50 +0100 From: Erwin Lansing <erwin@FreeBSD.org> To: Josh Paetzel <josh@tcbug.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Submitting a new port with dependancies not in the ports tree Message-ID: <20061224172650.GM92876@droso.net> In-Reply-To: <200612241053.03751.josh@tcbug.org> References: <200612241053.03751.josh@tcbug.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--rPH0Y77Oimr1cvNq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 10:53:03AM -0600, Josh Paetzel wrote: > I'm in the process of writing a port and it has a dependancy that's=20 > not in the ports tree, so I'm porting that as well. My question is=20 > what's the procedure in such a case? Should I submit them both as=20 > part of the same pr? Obviously the one can't be committed without=20 > the other. >=20 The easiest way is to submit the dependency first, then wait for the mail from GNATS and submit the second with a clear notice that the other PR (#10xxx) needs to be committed first. Cheers, -erwin --=20 Erwin Lansing http://droso.org Security is like an onion. (o_ _o) It's made up of several layers \\\_\ /_/// erwin@FreeBSD.org And it makes you cry. <____) (____> erwin@aauug.dk --rPH0Y77Oimr1cvNq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFFjrhaefbgcXQUYpwRAujtAJ93jxjxyV06H1fwSRhGmD42U8AZGACeN3fA SfwyPFWFHm/ZfQ89cIbxnIk= =nGVo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --rPH0Y77Oimr1cvNq--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061224172650.GM92876>