Am Tue, 09 Sep 2014 06:35:29 +0000 bugzilla-noreply_at_freebsd.org schrieb: > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=144203 > > --- Comment #8 from John Marino <marino_at_FreeBSD.org> --- > FYI, I'm removing this port tonight. We've waited long enough. > In the strain of a bug I reported I also tried to fix this port, since the prior maintainer seems to have abandonded this great port. I'm a bit pissed off about the rude tune I feel treated! The developer has patched the original sources to meet some FreeBSD requirements regarding a readline issue now fixed and especially some serious bugs in bib2ris and a transforming/migrating tool using UTF-8 encodings for LaTeX codings. Since not all patches are 100% tested (but they work graeat for me in a scientific environment), the upstream developer hestiates creating the new tarball. As I documented with this PR, I'm wating for the developer to publish a new tarball. I spent lot of time to provide a workaround for fixing the lack of the new tarball and some serious previously unresolved FreeBSD issues and the time I sacrificed is not only "working time"! I mention this since I'm feeling put under pressure as the note sent to me documents. What is the policy of FreeBSD's port system? There are lots of ports waiting to be fixed since they have serious issue, like silc-toolkit. Is this port also about to be deleted or isn't there a "lobby" preventing this? In a hurry, to prevent the destruction of the port textproc/refdb, I provided a patch. The patch is a bit messy since I had to incorporate all changes made in the meanwhile after creation of refdb-1.0.2.tar.gz (provided at: http://sourceforge.net/projects/refdb/files/latest/download). Please see PR "Bug 193484 - [textproc/refdb] Update port". With regards, oh
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:52 UTC