Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 18:40:32 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: emulation@freebsd.org, kworr@gmail.com Subject: Re: [ports-i386@freebsd.org: linux-f10-flashplugin-10.3r181.34 failed on i386 9] Message-ID: <4E45D610.9040203@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4e462f34.M0MwnBU6a9phTeTQ%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20110810060822.GZ60956@droso.net> <4E42E7F4.5040502@gmail.com> <201108111920.p7BJKGjc021859@higson.cam.lispworks.com> <4E44AEED.7070207@gmail.com> <4E45B36B.8050207@FreeBSD.org> <4e462f34.M0MwnBU6a9phTeTQ%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/13/2011 01:00, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > It still leaves the port broken from the disappearance of the > previous distfile until the maintainer has time to update the > port. Yup. > That is likely to be a not-insignificant length of time, > because we cannot reasonably expect port maintainers -- who are > usually volunteers -- to drop everything in order to immediately > fix this sort of problem. For popular ports the intersection of committers who care and are able to do something useful about it is substantially more than zero. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E45D610.9040203>