From owner-freebsd-stable Sat Aug 2 09:25:27 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA29897 for stable-outgoing; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 09:25:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ady.warp.starnets.ro (ady.warp.starnets.ro [193.226.124.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA29887; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 09:25:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ady@localhost) by ady.warp.starnets.ro (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id TAA05353; Sat, 2 Aug 1997 19:22:26 +0300 (EEST) Date: Sat, 2 Aug 1997 19:22:26 +0300 (EEST) From: Penisoara Adrian To: Michael Smith cc: Satoshi Asami , andreas@klemm.gtn.com, ports@FreeBSD.ORG, current@FreeBSD.ORG, stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ports-current/packages-current discontinued In-Reply-To: <199708021013.TAA09852@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Hi, On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Michael Smith wrote: > Ports should have less (or no) "official" support on -current. If you > are running -current, you should be able to take care of yourself. Well, what about folks running 3.0-current for SMP reasons and that have not so much ideea about UN*X/FreeBSD hacking ? By chance it happens that myself too I am in the same position... > Naturally, merging fixes to help them run on -current is desirable, as > it will make the cutover at the next major upgrade easier. Not only that, the ports should be buildable on every version of FreeBSD, if possible; it comes to my mind something like GNU's autoconfig scripts... I'd really like to see *one* single ports tree, buildable on every FreeBSD version; this might be hard, I know, but I think it well worths working on it. Ady (@warp.starnets.ro)