Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 9 Jan 2004 15:56:49 +0100
From:      Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz>
To:        Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Where is FreeBSD going?
Message-ID:  <20040109145649.GA5994@freepuppy.bellavista.cz>
In-Reply-To: <20040109133001.GK30356@toxic.magnesium.net>
References:  <3FFC03E5.7010305@iconoplex.co.uk> <200401071429.i07ETZMI068819@grimreaper.grondar.org> <20040107200838.GD86935@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040108071730.GA53328@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040108173642.GS54743@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040109003630.GA63979@xor.obsecurity.org> <20040109095246.GT54743@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <20040109133001.GK30356@toxic.magnesium.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
# adamw@FreeBSD.org / 2004-01-09 08:30:01 -0500:
> >> (01.09.2004 @ 0452 PST): Roman Neuhauser said, in 1.9K: <<
> > # kris@obsecurity.org / 2004-01-08 16:36:30 -0800:
> > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 06:36:42PM +0100, Roman Neuhauser wrote:
> > > >     That might be technically true, but the precise semantics of
> > > >     "(semi-)freeze" aren't as widely known as you seem to think.
> > > >     E. g. yesterday or today I received an email from a committer in
> > > >     response to my two mails to ports@ (the first urging a repocopy
> > > >     requested in a PR some time ago, the other retracting the request
> > > >     because of the freeze) saying (paraphrased) "to my surprise I was
> > > >     told repocopies are allowed during freeze".  Some people just prefer
> > > >     to err on the safe side.
> > > 
> > > Repo-copies are not allowed during the freeze, but are any other time.
> >  
> >     ok, so someone (at least two people) out there is confused about
> >     this, and this only further proves my statement about the uncertainty.
> 
> Messages stating what Kris said are sent out at the beginning of every
> freeze.

    But it wouldn't hurt if this info was part of

    a) porters-handbook
    b) freebsd-releng with a pointer from porters-handbook

    right?
 
> > > >     Also, I would have thought the Porter's handbook would e. g.
> > > >     contain info on preventing installation of .la files (I
> > > >     gathered from the ports@ list that they shouldn't be
> > > >     installed), isn't this lack quite
> > > >     obvious?
> > > 
> > > No, please raise this on the ports list.
> > 
> >     ok, cc'd to ports, Mail-Followup-To set.
> 
> A fix for this is given in
> 	http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/porting.html
> in the section entitled "Libtool Issues."

    www.freebsd.org/gnome/ is pehaps the last place I would be looking
    in search for this. doesn't the para belong in porters-handbook?

-- 
If you cc me or remove the list(s) completely I'll most likely ignore
your message.    see http://www.eyrie.org./~eagle/faqs/questions.html



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040109145649.GA5994>