From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Nov 28 18:10: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from norn.ca.eu.org (cr965240-b.abtsfd1.bc.wave.home.com [24.113.19.137]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9025114D8D for ; Sun, 28 Nov 1999 18:10:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from cpiazza@norn.ca.eu.org) Received: by norn.ca.eu.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4518D1D6; Sun, 28 Nov 1999 18:10:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 1999 18:10:00 -0800 From: Chris Piazza To: "Chris D. Faulhaber" Cc: Will Andrews , freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports/15135: new port: devel/cervisia Message-ID: <19991128181000.A16943@norn.ca.eu.org> References: <199911290200.SAA82918@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from jedgar@fxp.org on Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 09:06:19PM -0500 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 4.0-CURRENT i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 09:06:19PM -0500, Chris D. Faulhaber wrote: > On Sun, 28 Nov 1999, Will Andrews wrote: > > I considered porting it a while ago but hesitated due to the > aforementioned problems. I agree that kde should be using 2.95.2 > throughout; however, as I stated a while back, a lot of people are not > gonna be happy with recompiling their libs to use use new applications. > > And I still pose the question, is it okay to port an application > requiring the new gcc and marking as broken for < -current until the > qt/kde apps require the new gcc and/or mainstream release uses it. I'd say it's fine. I did this with my port of FINE until they added support for qt2. -Chris -- cpiazza@jaxon.net cpiazza@FreeBSD.org Abbotsford, BC, Canada To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message