From owner-freebsd-ports Mon Mar 31 08:00:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA24080 for ports-outgoing; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 08:00:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from sovcom.kiae.su (sovcom.kiae.su [193.125.152.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id HAA24035; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 07:59:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by sovcom.kiae.su id AA17781 (5.65.kiae-1 ); Mon, 31 Mar 1997 18:46:19 +0300 Received: by sovcom.KIAE.su (UUMAIL/2.0); Mon, 31 Mar 97 18:46:18 +0300 Received: (from ache@localhost) by nagual.ru (8.8.5/8.8.5) id TAA00613; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:41:20 +0400 (MSD) Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:41:17 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Cc: John Fieber , Kevin Eliuk , FreeBSD-Ports , peter@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Error installing pine-3.96 In-Reply-To: <11118.859817826@time.cdrom.com> Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > I'm not necessarily advocating going the multi-branch route and > imposing the same disciplines on ports/ that we have on src/, either > (though that may eventually be necessary and I'm not saying anything > either way on that yet), but it would be nice if ports maintainers > made a special effort to see that a port compiled under *both* > branches of the OS. Most porters are probably running 2.2 anyway, and > if thud will start staying up more than 4-5 hours at a time, we can > have them test the 3.0 operability there. Maybe nice idea in general, but personally I not run 2.2 and can't spend a time to compile test them under remote 2.2 box, so somebody else please. BTW (returning to Subject:) is "install -d" not in 2.2? I think it was there... -- Andrey A. Chernov http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/