Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2001 15:25:51 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Thomas Hurst <tom.hurst@clara.net> Cc: Peter Pentchev <roam@ringlet.net>, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Should we keep the vim5 port? Message-ID: <20011107152551.C12949@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20011107171055.C20308@sploo>; from tom.hurst@clara.net on Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 05:10:55PM %2B0000 References: <20011107074751.A93028@dragon.nuxi.com> <20011107175751.B8623@straylight.oblivion.bg> <20011107171055.C20308@sploo>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 07, 2001 at 05:10:55PM +0000, Thomas Hurst wrote: > ATM it doesn't look like this is going to change for at least > another month. I'm inclined to ask the maintainer to keep the > patches together so instead of 100 seperate files, have 10 bigger > patches/tarballs/whatever. The extra bandwidth's probably going to be > offset by the reduced latency (and maybe gzipping) anyway. Please do NOT. Some of the patches are for non-Unix and would require me to fetch the non-unix source tarball in order to have them apply. The one patch per file works very well and was a compromise between Bram and myself (and maybe others chimmed in also). > And can I ask why patch 12 (any maybe a few others) was missed? As I > recall that was for a crash bug with the polish translation - are they > banned from using FreeBSD? :) Try to apply it, you'll see. :-) [hinted at above] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011107152551.C12949>