On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 07:33:35PM +0100, Jon Olsson wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 05:56:58PM +0100, Hannah Schroeter wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 04, 2006 at 06:28:44PM -0500, Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > >The following appears to work for me.  I'm not really familiar
> > >with erlang--I was just hoping to get ejabberd working...
> > 
> > Diff against the port you sent follows.
> > 
> > And... Please commit something before the upcoming release. The erlang port
> > that is in the tree just doesn't work *at all*, so anything is better
> > than that.
> 
>   Sorry for the late reply.  Just want to chime in here and confirm that
> the erlang port millert posted + Hannahs patches works fine for me on OpenBSD
> 3.8-currentish/sparc64.  Building it on 3.9-beta/i386 right now.
> 
>   And I agree with Hannah, please commit this port as is, since it's
> much better than the one currently in the ports tree, it's just broken
> and old.

I think now is not the right time to bring in more updates, as has been
asked by a few people already. We like to get a port right before
committing it. 'Anything is better than...' does not make sense to me.
I suggest you finetune the erlang port after tree lock and then it can
get the necessary testing.

steven

Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

Reply via email to