From owner-freebsd-ports  Sun Apr 23 01:00:05 1995
Return-Path: ports-owner
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id BAA15879
          for ports-outgoing; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 01:00:05 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with ESMTP id BAA15846
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 01:00:00 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.9/8.6.9) id AAA26617; Sun, 23 Apr 1995 00:59:54 -0700
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 00:59:54 -0700
Message-Id: <199504230759.AAA26617@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com
CC: jmz@freefall.cdrom.com, ports@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: <6988.798593826@freefall.cdrom.com> (jkh@freefall.cdrom.com)
Subject: Re: XFree86 Makefile
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=)
Sender: ports-owner@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * I think we should put it into the framework.  It's a "magic feature"
 * that users and ports hackers shouldn't need to know about.  Over time,
 * it will change and mutate and I *really* won't want users and ports
 * hackers knowing about it.  They might otherwise start making
 * assumptions about it!

Okay okay, I didn't get any support, so you guys win 2 to 1. :)

I can do this myself, but I don't want to screw you in the middle of
your modifications of bsd.port.mk, so I'll leave it to you, Jordan.

Of course, if you want me to do it, just drop me a note.

Satoshi