Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 15 Feb 2004 13:38:59 -0800
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
Cc:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Subject:   Re: ghostscript-afpl vs ghostscript-gnu
Message-ID:  <20040215213859.GA56967@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402151518500.8830-100000@pancho>
References:  <20040215203341.GC53260@xor.obsecurity.org> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0402151518500.8830-100000@pancho>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 03:27:57PM -0600, Mark Linimon wrote:
> > Eww, how did this superfluous variable get into bsd.port.mk?  You're
> > supposed to use GHOSTSCRIPT_PORT to specify which of the n ghostscript
> > ports you want to use.
>=20
> As ports/36112, which was originally someone else's PR, but one
> on which you had commented "this patch needs to be reworked for
> the current bsd.port.mk" which I then did.  See audit log for
> details.  You've got my permission to change it if you hate it.
>=20

It looks like the WITH_cruft appeared in the audit trail at a later
point.  Actually I think some of my responses to Jens were not
recorded in the audit trail either.

Kris

--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFAL+bzWry0BWjoQKURAiRIAJ9k55bsrqdkzPhBS80abVdJiAUgTACgze/0
K3IkqxlJvmrxO7XPxn5R8mY=
=jqnJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--7JfCtLOvnd9MIVvH--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040215213859.GA56967>