Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 17:00:00 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Subject: Re: NO MORE '-BETA' Message-ID: <20010316170000.R29888@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <20010316164457.A57253@hub.freebsd.org>; from TrimYourCC@nuxi.com on Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 04:44:57PM -0800 References: <Pine.BSF.4.32.0103161514370.25253-100000@mail.wolves.k12.mo.us> <XFMail.010316133904.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20010316134349.K29888@fw.wintelcom.net> <20010316163748Z.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <20010316164457.A57253@hub.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* David O'Brien <TrimYourCC@nuxi.com> [010316 16:45] wrote: > On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 04:37:48PM -0800, Jordan Hubbard wrote: > > I'll also expect that the ports folks will simply bump the bento > > cluster "artificially" up to 4.4-RELEASE by setting the versions there > > manually, so the packages will all bear the correct information. > > This doesn't solve the ports problem as ports maintainers cannot use > bento for their own build testing. To take this approach puts us back in > the FORTRAN, punched cards, batch days. > > A ports committer under the above conditions have to see in the bento > error logs there was a configure problem, guess at the fix (since it > isn't as easy to test on their own box), commit a fix, wait 24-36 hours > later to see if indeed the commit fixed the problem, repeat if needed... Or teach the ports committers the way to bump newver.sh themselves. A minor step that should be trivial for them to do. -- -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010316170000.R29888>