From owner-freebsd-ports  Sat Aug  2 03:02:44 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA15706
          for ports-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 03:02:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.11])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id DAA15700
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 03:02:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from smap@localhost)
          by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id FAA00491; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 05:02:08 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from sjx-ca30-16.ix.netcom.com(204.31.235.176) by dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma000467; Sat Aug  2 05:01:55 1997
Received: (from asami@localhost) by blimp.mimi.com (8.8.6/8.6.9) id DAA11295; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 03:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 03:01:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199708021001.DAA11295@blimp.mimi.com>
To: davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au
CC: ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <199708020925.TAA00380@labs.usn.blaze.net.au> (message from David Nugent on Sat, 02 Aug 1997 19:25:20 +1000)
Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

 * Someone mentioned recently that thud is being rebuilt and will be
 * put on-line with some version of -current. If this is the case, I'll
 * be happy to take on this task there. I'm assuming it is a case of
 * building and finding out where it falls over and fixing it, correct?

You are correct.  Actually, as I just mentioned in the other message,
if you build the ports on the pre-tcl-8.0beta2-current system,
everything will just work.  (Everything except flat-out broken stuff,
I mean.)

By the way, I think David (O'Brien, that is) is also interested, he
raised his hands last time I asked for someone to build
2.2-packages...we were waiting for admin1 to come back online, and now
I'm on the 2.2 side, so maybe he can work on -current with you.

Whatever happens on the tcl front (and whether the ports tree will
restart officially supporting -current) , I think it's a good idea to
have someone else building -current packages.  I don't intend to go
back to building them until at least after 2.2.5 is released.

By the way^2, I have been thinking for awhile about signing the
packages with pgp, maybe it's a good time to start that now, since
there will be packages from multiple origins.  (Let's compare notes on
this in private mail, no need to bore others with the ittsy bitsy
details.)

 * I thought we were ramping up to remove it. You can imagine my surprise
 * to see the 8.0 beta committed. :-/

Me too.

 * I guess, my first task, should I decide to accept it, is to figure
 * out how to cope with tcl8 in the source tree and tcl7.5 in ports.

Well, that's not the whole story.  You have to do that without
breaking 2.2-stable compatibility.  There are some ports that require
some private headers and stuff.  This is where I gave up.

Satoshi