From owner-svn-ports-head@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 6 06:07:46 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B769133F; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 06:07:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AA29235; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 06:07:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.22] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D35A438BD; Mon, 6 Oct 2014 01:07:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <54323187.7040603@marino.st> Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 08:07:03 +0200 From: John Marino Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrej Zverev , Bartek Rutkowski Subject: Re: svn commit: r370131 - in head/net-mgmt: . nagios-check_dhcp.pl References: <201410052140.s95LeUa9030114@svn.freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-ports-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-ports-all@freebsd.org" , "ports-committers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: SVN commit messages for the ports tree for head List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 06:07:46 -0000 On 10/6/2014 05:35, Andrej Zverev wrote: > 2. @${REINPLACE_CMD} -e "s,/usr/bin/perl,${PERL}," ${WRKSRC}/${PORTNAME} > <- you can use USES=shebangfix Be careful with this one -- I made a similar comment and then found out the script started with "#! /usr/bin/perl" where the space prevented shebangfix from working. This could be a similar situation. > P.S. Approved by: mentors (implicit) <- not sure about this they both > did it, or only one of them and why don't write who they are? Robak has implicit approval from both mentors for most commits. He's been given guidelines on when he should seek explicit approval. I'd says "mentors" (plural) is appropriate. As for why not written, dunno. Obviously it can be looked up. I think the key message is that explicit approval was not obtained, not repeating who the mentors are which each commit (which doesn't change). As one of his mentors, I didn't have a problem with the message.