From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 3 11:57:36 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EE8416A620; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:57:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bsam@ns.kfs.ru) Received: from ns.kfs.ru (kfs.kfs.ru [62.183.117.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30EE34431B; Mon, 3 Jul 2006 11:39:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bsam@ns.kfs.ru) Received: from bsam by ns.kfs.ru with local (Exim 4.54 (FreeBSD)) id 1FxMmO-000AjA-Ao; Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:39:52 +0400 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <200606291951.k5TJpvhF008641@repoman.freebsd.org> <06318347@bsam.ru> <20060703115957.hzmpcz1vkwgcoogw@netchild.homeip.net> From: Boris Samorodov Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 15:39:52 +0400 In-Reply-To: <20060703115957.hzmpcz1vkwgcoogw@netchild.homeip.net> (Alexander Leidinger's message of "Mon, 03 Jul 2006 11:59:57 +0200") Message-ID: <70621799@serv3.int.kfs.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: "Boris B. Samorodov" Cc: cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org, Marcel Moolenaar , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/devel/linux_kdump Makefile X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2006 11:57:37 -0000 On Mon, 03 Jul 2006 11:59:57 +0200 Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting Boris Samorodov (from Mon, 03 Jul 2006 02:47:00 +0400): > >> Modified files: > >> devel/linux_kdump Makefile > >> Log: > >> Drop maintainership. I'm not using the linuxulator at all and don't > >> keep up with development on that front, nor with ports related to > >> it. > > I'm not sure that dropping the port to freebsd-emulation@ is the It was an invitation to conversation. ;-) > > right thing to do. May be ports@ is a better one. > If you think it doesn't belong to emulation@, feel free to assign it to me. Let it be emulation@. Thanks for clarification. WBR -- Boris B. Samorodov, Research Engineer InPharmTech Co, http://www.ipt.ru Telephone & Internet Service Provider