ports/91962: [patch] Fix missing dependancy in www/cadaver
Josh Paetzel
josh at tcbug.org
Fri Jan 20 02:30:14 UTC 2006
The following reply was made to PR ports/91962; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Josh Paetzel <josh at tcbug.org>
To: Edwin Groothuis <edwin at freebsd.org>
Cc:
Subject: Re: ports/91962: [patch] Fix missing dependancy in www/cadaver
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 20:20:28 -0600
On Thursday 19 January 2006 05:28, you wrote:
> Synopsis: [patch] Fix missing dependancy in www/cadaver
>
> State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
> State-Changed-By: edwin
> State-Changed-When: Thu Jan 19 11:27:26 UTC 2006
> State-Changed-Why:
> Leftover files:
>
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 13745 Jan 19 11:25
> usr/local/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/cadaver.mo -r--r--r-- 1 root
> wheel 13885 Jan 19 11:25
> usr/local/share/locale/it/LC_MESSAGES/cadaver.mo -r--r--r-- 1 root
> wheel 26663 Jan 19 11:25
> usr/local/share/locale/en at quot/LC_MESSAGES/cadaver.mo
>
> Are you sure that en at quot is a proper line?
>
>
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=91962
I think I'm a tad confused. If I reply to the mail you sent me it
goes to freebsd-ports-bugs at FreeBSD.org
If I submit a followup to the PR it points to bug-followup at freebsd.org
Which of the two would be appropriate?
In the meantime kris@ has marked the port as broken. (Yes, I've taken
took much time to deal with this) Should I modify the patch to
remove the BROKEN tag or is that worthy of a different PR? Thanks
for your patience and help, I'm slowly but surely getting up to speed
on this port maintainer thing. :)
--
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
More information about the freebsd-ports-bugs
mailing list