From owner-freebsd-ports  Thu Dec 26 00:58:13 1996
Return-Path: <owner-ports>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id AAA14659
          for ports-outgoing; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 00:58:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from veda.is (root@veda.is [193.4.230.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id AAA14654
          for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 00:58:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from veda.is (adam@ubiq.veda.is [193.4.230.60]) by veda.is (8.8.4/8.8.2) with ESMTP id JAA13643; Thu, 26 Dec 1996 09:00:17 GMT
Message-Id: <199612260900.JAA13643@veda.is>
To: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: bsd.port.mk on freefall 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 25 Dec 1996 22:47:42 PST."
             <199612260647.WAA05315@baloon.mimi.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 1996 09:04:16 +0000
From: Adam David <adam@veda.is>
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>  * >  * freefall still has bsd.port.mk from 4.Dec, while thud has it from 17=
>  * =2EDec.
> 
> Please fix your mailing program, this "=" business is ugly and hard to 
> read! ;)

My copy back from the mailing list did not have any quoted-printable
rubbish in it, and yours only has it where your editor inserts its own
line-break. Therefore it must be happening at your end.
Oh, you are asking me to shorten my lines. ;)

>  * minimum differences should exist between 2.2 and 3.0-current(2.2-release-=
> 
> freefall doesn't run 2.2.
> 
> Satoshi

I think the same applies for 2.1.x as 2.2, right? As I understand it,
bsd.port.mk is a key component of the ports system, and whereas ports
cannot be guaranteed to build under a less than current system, it is
reasonable to allow ports to build where other changes to the system
do not prevent it.

Adam