Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:58:31 +0400 From: Sergey Matveychuk <sem@FreeBSD.org> To: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org, Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@FreeBSD.org>, portmgr@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ports/82356: gmake -> gmake-devel repocopy request Message-ID: <42B31D57.1040703@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <200506171850.j5HIo4UM035054@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <200506171850.j5HIo4UM035054@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ade Lovett wrote: > Synopsis: gmake -> gmake-devel repocopy request > > State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed > State-Changed-By: ade > State-Changed-When: Fri Jun 17 18:43:24 GMT 2005 > State-Changed-Why: > Sorry, such a repocopy will lead to considerable confusion over which > gmake to use. No other infrastructure changes would happen, so this is > likely to turn into an enormous problem, for minimal (if any) gain. What kind of problem do you mean? > > Submitter can certainly offer up the patchset for others to try, but > another port is simply not the right way to do things here - the > current fun and games with various bison ports should be a pretty > good indication of how such well-intentioned ideas can lead to major > problems further down the road. I just want port with bug-fixed gmake. > > As and when the GNU make folks release a new version of gmake, it will > certainly be adopted, after testing, and it is this approach that should > be considered here. > > > Responsible-Changed-From-To: sem->ade > Responsible-Changed-By: ade > Responsible-Changed-When: Fri Jun 17 18:43:24 GMT 2005 > Responsible-Changed-Why: > gmake MAINTAINER hat on. > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=82356
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42B31D57.1040703>