From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 12 13:24:38 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 863C316A4CE; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:24:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from meitner.wh.uni-dortmund.de (meitner.wh.Uni-Dortmund.DE
	[129.217.129.133])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 509AC43D1F; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 13:24:38 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net)
Received: from lofi.dyndns.org (pc2-105.intern.meitner [10.3.12.105])
	by meitner.wh.uni-dortmund.de (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 474101675E2; Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:24:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost.invalid (kiste.my.domain [192.168.8.4])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by lofi.dyndns.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i1CLOXnJ026339
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO);
	Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:24:33 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from michaelnottebrock@gmx.net)
From: Michael Nottebrock <michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 22:24:29 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.6
References: <200402110716.i1B7GH9D017803@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<xzplln8k3fp.fsf@dwp.des.no> <20040212122617.T88889@qbhto.arg>
In-Reply-To: <20040212122617.T88889@qbhto.arg>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
  protocol="application/pgp-signature";
  micalg=pgp-sha1;
  boundary="Boundary-02=_Q8+KAC00SHTYpEe";
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200402122224.33190.michaelnottebrock@gmx.net>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
cc: "cvs-all@FreeBSD.org" <cvs-all@freebsd.org>
cc: "ports-committers@FreeBSD.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org>
cc: Pav Lucistnik <pav@freebsd.org>
cc: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@freebsd.org>
cc: "cvs-ports@FreeBSD.org" <cvs-ports@freebsd.org>
cc: Dag-Erling =?iso-8859-1?q?Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no>
Subject: Re: REINPLACE vs. perl -i;
	and why ports are too complex for their own good
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 21:24:38 -0000


--Boundary-02=_Q8+KAC00SHTYpEe
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On Thursday 12 February 2004 21:41, Doug Barton wrote:
> Now, years later, we are STILL arguing about this topic,

And the argument has become even more ridiculous. Please, no bikeshedding o=
ver=20
this one again, _please_. I find the whole "oh my god, ports don't do stuff=
=20
on $ancient_version_of_freebsd" whine to be totally pointless. Ports is NOT=
=20
the base-system, ports are not and cannot be supposed to meet any=20
stable-branch criteria.

=2D-=20
   ,_,   | Michael Nottebrock               | lofi@freebsd.org
 (/^ ^\) | FreeBSD - The Power to Serve     | http://www.freebsd.org
   \u/   | K Desktop Environment on FreeBSD | http://freebsd.kde.org

--Boundary-02=_Q8+KAC00SHTYpEe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: signature

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

iD8DBQBAK+8QXhc68WspdLARAsJYAJ4yUEhLhl9MczRbUTx+CAe4kNcbuACfU4xw
Qklj2MWhXzcVZ5vH9EtLaB0=
=sU2V
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Boundary-02=_Q8+KAC00SHTYpEe--