On 12-12-2011 22:23, Doug Barton wrote:
> Not only is this not necessary if you run xscreensaver already, it's
> probably a bad idea. At minimum, can you make this optional?
> 
[cvs-lists omitted]

I could make it optional if you insist, but if you do a fresh install
with xfce4-utils but without xlockmore you'll notice the dangling
invocation.  I don't see that xlockmore and xscreensaver conflict, so
why would it be a Bad Idea(TM) ?

Regards,
René

> On 12/11/2011 04:56, Rene Ladan wrote:
>> rene        2011-12-11 12:56:18 UTC
>>
>>   FreeBSD ports repository
>>
>>   Modified files:
>>     sysutils/xfce4-utils Makefile 
>>   Log:
>>   - Add a runtime dependency on x11/xlockmore so that xflock4 can invoke 
>> xlock.
>>   - Bump PORTREVISION
>>   
>>   Feature safe:   yes
>>   
>>   Revision  Changes    Path
>>   1.58      +3 -0      ports/sysutils/xfce4-utils/Makefile
>>
>> http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/sysutils/xfce4-utils/Makefile.diff?&r1=1.57&r2=1.58&f=h
>>
> 
_______________________________________________
freebsd-xfce@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-xfce
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-xfce-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to