On 2008-Oct-29 16:09:23 +0800, FBSD1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It's my understanding that a port maintainer has to install the port for >real any time a change is made to the port make files or a update to the >source of the software to test and verify the changes work as wanted.
I'm not sure what you mean by "install the port for real". A port maintainer is responsible for updating his/her ports and verifying that they work. This presumably includes building and installing the port. >Creating the package after this is just one command and a ftp upload >to the package server. This isn't true for a whole variety of reasons. > Why are maintainers being given approval to apply their >changes without creating the required package? Because packages aren't "required" and creation of packages is nothing to do with ports maintainers. > This is just lax management >on the part of the people who do the authorizing of the changes. I suggest you do a bit more reading and a bit less pontificating. > Missing >packages increases user frustration level and makes FreeBSD look like its >being mis-managed. Not all ports have packages for a variety of reasons and there is no requirement that every port has packages for every supported version of FreeBSD. Maybe you need to learn how to "cd /usr/ports/... && make install" -- Peter Jeremy Please excuse any delays as the result of my ISP's inability to implement an MTA that is either RFC2821-compliant or matches their claimed behaviour.
Description: PGP signature