On Jul 28, 2007, at 05:36 , Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
Was I wrong that in contrast to 259, in 261 there should not be a
'-' in front of the 3 ${BUILD_VERSION} in post-patch?
Nope, you weren't wrong. It just happened to be a cosmetic fix, only
addressing issues within the manpages themsel
Ade wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2007, at 03:03 , Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> > I think, there should be a '-' in front of every ${BUILD_VERSION}.
> >
> > Additionally to the one at --program-suffix, there are three more
> > missing.
>
> The appropriate fix has already been committed. Given the very sma
On Jul 28, 2007, at 03:03 , Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
I think, there should be a '-' in front of every ${BUILD_VERSION}.
Additionally to the one at --program-suffix, there are three more
missing.
The appropriate fix has already been committed. Given the very small
window of things bein
Alex Dupre wrote:
> Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> > ===> autoconf-2.61_1 is already installed
> > You may wish to ``make deinstall'' and install this port again
> > by ``make reinstall'' to upgrade it properly.
> > If you really wish to overwrite the old port of devel/autoconf2
Alex Dupre wrote:
> I think it's missing a '-' in the --program-suffix of autoconf261.
And the same for automake 1.10.
--
Alex Dupre
___
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send
Jan Henrik Sylvester wrote:
> ===> autoconf-2.61_1 is already installed
> You may wish to ``make deinstall'' and install this port again
> by ``make reinstall'' to upgrade it properly.
> If you really wish to overwrite the old port of devel/autoconf261
> without deleting i
===> autoconf-2.61_1 is already installed
You may wish to ``make deinstall'' and install this port again
by ``make reinstall'' to upgrade it properly.
If you really wish to overwrite the old port of devel/autoconf261
without deleting it first, set the variable "FORCE_PKG_
