Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 17:07:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@Glue.umd.edu> To: Stefan Esser <se@zpr.uni-koeln.de> Cc: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee>, Stefan Esser <se@zpr.uni-koeln.de>, andreas@klemm.gtn.com, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/print/ghostscript4 Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960730170534.18093B-100000@fiber.eng.umd.edu> In-Reply-To: <199607301822.UAA23117@x14.mi.uni-koeln.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 30 Jul 1996, Stefan Esser wrote: > > Problems like this should be real easily fixable - or will something more > > than the number in the filename have to change in the makefile? > > Sure. But what I meant to say was, that if only > the name of a distribution files changes, then > we should generally keep the old name in the > port's Makefile, in order to reduce unneccesary > multi-megabyte FTP transfers. > > A note might be required in the Makefile, which > indicates that the TAR file remains unchanged > and thus the version from the previous release > will still be used ... I'm not sure I agree with this. The old tar file is very likely to become much harder to get, and keeping parts of older versions, to balance off ftp loading time, well, I think this isn't wise. I think it would just cause much more confusion than the time saved, for the largest number of people. ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@eng.umd.edu | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run Journey2 and n3lxx, both FreeBSD (301) 220-2114 | version 2.2 current -- and great FUN! ----------------------------+-----------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.3.91.960730170534.18093B-100000>