On 2017/05/26 12:49, Heppler, J. Scott wrote: > On May 21, 2017: 18:00, Daniel Jakots wrote: > > On Sun, 21 May 2017 14:27:09 -0700, "Heppler, J. Scott" > > <shep...@centurylink.net> wrote: > > > > > ? ports/x11/tint2/patches > > > > It looks like something is missing :)
yes. "make patch" fails with the diff as sent. assuming patches/ has the correct patches in, i would: mv patches patches- cvs up -PdA patches rsync -avC --delete patches-/ patches/ cd patches cvs add / cvs rm as necessary cd .. cvs di -uNp > > > =================================================================== > > > RCS file: /cvs/ports/x11/tint2/pkg/PLIST,v > > > retrieving revision 1.1.1.1 > > > diff -u -p -u -r1.1.1.1 PLIST > > > --- ports/x11/tint2/pkg/PLIST 11 Sep 2015 14:14:07 > > > -0000 1.1.1.1 +++ ports/x11/tint2/pkg/PLIST 21 May 2017 > > > 21:12:38 -0000 @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@ > > > -@comment $OpenBSD: PLIST,v 1.1.1.1 2015/09/11 14:14:07 sthen Exp $ > > > -@pkgpath x11/tint > > > +@comment $OpenBSD$ > > > > I think the @pkgpath must stay. > > I'm glad to update this but I want to confirm the change. I submitted > the last x11/tint2 update and my memory is that the @pkgpath entry was > to provide seamless upgrades due to the name change tint -> tint2. My > understanding previously was that the @pkgpath entry would only be > necessary for 2 release cycles - the last upgrade was 20 months ago. > > -- > J. Scott Heppler > I don't see a reason to remove the @pkgpath marker in this case. We don't *support* upgrades that skip over versions but there's no reason to actively break them unless it's hurting something..
