On Saturday, 30 December 2006 at 3:07:39 -0600, Mark Linimon wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 11:59:35PM +0000, Greg Lehey wrote: >> Looks like I committed too soon. We're missing too many dependencies >> for this to be any use to anybody. Mark BROKEN for the time being. > > BROKEN means that pointyhat will try to build it anyways. IGNORE means > that it won't. The latter should be used, IMHO.
OK, done. There's a bigger problem, though: I did some cursory testing before committing this port, and it made all the right noises. But when I tried to use it in earnest, I fell through the false floor, and there be daemons. I've spent some time trying to fix the problems, but I'm beginning to wonder if it's worth it. So, here we have a newly born port, abandoned by its mother. What do we do? I can think of a number of things: 1. Delete it. 2. Mark it as "deprecated" and go through the process. 3. Send the results and the patches back to the author and see if he cares. My suggestion is (2) and (3), but I'll go along with a majority decision. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
pgpeCjRvX6b9w.pgp
Description: PGP signature