Pav Lucistnik wrote:
Gábor Kövesdán píše v so 12. 08. 2006 v 23:47 +0200:
Pav Lucistnik wrote:
pav 2006-08-12 21:26:07 UTC
FreeBSD ports repository
Modified files:
security/lsh Makefile
Added files:
security/lsh/files patch-nettle-openssl.c
Log:
- Fix build on 4.X
- Respect CC and CFLAGS
PR: ports/101750
Submitted by: Babak Farrokhi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (maintainer)
Revision Changes Path
1.35 +2 -0 ports/security/lsh/Makefile
1.1 +10 -0 ports/security/lsh/files/patch-nettle-openssl.c (new)
I think it also needs a PORTREVISION bump if you make a port respect CC
since such change affects the build phase of the port.
Imagine you are user with already installed lsh; do you want to
recompile just because of this change?
Yes, because I like optimized binaries. :)
Imagine you are user who downloads the package from the ftp site.
Do you mind you don't have this change?
No, of course not, but there are other cases when a user might not want
to do so, but they are require a PORTREVISION bump, e.g. adding
something specific thing to OPTIONS. If the give user doesn't use the
new functionality, (s)he will get the same, but portupgrade will notice
the bump at all.
--
Cheers,
Gabor
_______________________________________________
cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
