From owner-freebsd-ports Sat Jan 17 05:40:06 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA27976 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Sat, 17 Jan 1998 05:40:06 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from lsd.relcom.eu.net (ache@lsd.relcom.eu.net [193.124.23.23]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id FAA27920; Sat, 17 Jan 1998 05:39:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ache@lsd.relcom.eu.net) Received: (from ache@localhost) by lsd.relcom.eu.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA05727; Sat, 17 Jan 1998 16:39:45 +0300 (MSK) (envelope-from ache) Date: Sat, 17 Jan 1998 16:39:43 +0300 (MSK) From: =?KOI8-R?B?4c7E0sXKIP7F0s7P1w==?= X-Sender: ache@lsd.relcom.eu.net To: Eivind Eklund cc: Satoshi Asami , gpalmer@FreeBSD.ORG, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: amanda port, empty PATCH_STRIP= lines causes trouble In-Reply-To: <86d8hr5ioz.fsf@bitbox.follo.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 17 Jan 1998, Eivind Eklund wrote: > Because this break support for older 2.2 machines, for one. Besides, > "just making it work" without understanding the ramifications are a > very bad idea for important utilities (like the ports collection). I talk about not yet released -stable, not about older 2.2 installations which have their own patch / bsd.port.mk All ramifications and differences clearly described in patch(1), so I see no needs to additionly "understand" them besides reading the manual. -- Andrey A. Chernov http://www.nagual.pp.ru/~ache/