From chat95@mac.com  Thu Mar 30 02:36:13 2006
Return-Path: <chat95@mac.com>
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF1EC16A400;
	Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:36:13 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from chat95@mac.com)
Received: from smtpout.mac.com (smtpout.mac.com [17.250.248.72])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C23443D45;
	Thu, 30 Mar 2006 02:36:13 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from chat95@mac.com)
Received: from mac.com (smtpin08-en2 [10.13.10.153])
	by smtpout.mac.com (Xserve/8.12.11/smtpout15/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k2U2aDkT024432;
	Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:36:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([133.11.172.102])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by mac.com (Xserve/smtpin08/MantshX 4.0) with ESMTP id k2U2a8Do009260;
	Wed, 29 Mar 2006 18:36:11 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <20060330.113600.02277450.chat95@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2006 11:36:00 +0900 (JST)
From: NAKATA Maho <chat95@mac.com>
To: ade@freebsd.org
Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org, maho@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <CFF39396-9FF9-4B9B-BC37-DE54CB0364E5@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: patch for gmake
References: <3702B103-B44C-4D81-BBD9-030675ABFB02@gmail.com>
	<20060328.070333.41663600.chat95@mac.com>
	<CFF39396-9FF9-4B9B-BC37-DE54CB0364E5@freebsd.org>

>Number:         95095
>Category:       ports
>Synopsis:       Re: patch for gmake
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       serious
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    ade
>State:          closed
>Quarter:        
>Keywords:       
>Date-Required:  
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   current-users
>Arrival-Date:   Thu Mar 30 02:40:16 GMT 2006
>Closed-Date:    Thu Mar 30 03:38:31 GMT 2006
>Last-Modified:  Thu Mar 30 03:50:18 GMT 2006
>Originator:     
>Release:        
>Organization:
>Environment:
>Description:
 In Message-ID: <CFF39396-9FF9-4B9B-BC37-DE54CB0364E5@freebsd.org> 
 Ade Lovett <ade@freebsd.org> wrote:
 
 > 
 > On Mar 27, 2006, at 14:03 , NAKATA Maho wrote:
 > 
 > > Hello ade,
 > > a patch for gmake has been submitted. Could you please invesitvate  
 > > this?
 > > patch is merely using hash rather than directly using malloc.
 > > I think it is safe...and we don't need devel/gmake-devel any more.
 > 
 > I'm waiting for an updated version of the patch that conforms to the  
 > guidelines laid out in the Porters Handbook.  Once that's been taken  
 > care of, it will get scheduled for an -exp build run at some  
 > convenient time.
 
 Thanks for your reply. I reviwed gmake.diff by Robert Muir again
 but I don't see a problem(it does bump portrevision correctly and
 merely adding patches). Could you please where is the point which
 violate the guidebook?
 
 All the best,
 -- NAKATA, Maho (maho@FreeBSD.org)
>How-To-Repeat:
>Fix:
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
State-Changed-From-To: open->closed 
State-Changed-By: linimon 
State-Changed-When: Thu Mar 30 03:37:44 UTC 2006 
State-Changed-Why:  
I can't figure out which base PR this was supposed to apply to.  Close it 
but assign it to ade@ so followups wind up somewhere useful. 


Responsible-Changed-From-To: gnats-admin->ade 
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon 
Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 30 03:37:44 UTC 2006 
Responsible-Changed-Why:  

http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=95095 

Adding to audit trail:

This apparently applies to ports/94526.

From: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org>
To: Mark Linimon <linimon@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Ade Lovett <ade@FreeBSD.org>,
 NAKATA Maho <chat95@mac.com>,
 bug-followup@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: ports/95095: Re: patch for gmake
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:44:28 -0800

 Just for tracking purposes, the PR containing the patch which will be  
 set up for an -exp run is 94526.
 
 As and when 5.5/6.1 RELEASEs are out the door, I'll co-ordinate with  
 portmgr@ on getting the run done.
 
 -aDe
 
>Unformatted:
