--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2011-Mar-29 13:51:21 +0200, Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de> wrote:
>Both graphics/netpbm and graphics/netpbm-devel are *WAY*
>out of date (5 to 6 years).
I don't understand you. In my experience, the netpbm ports have
always been updated fairly regularly. The ports currently have:
STABLE_PORTVERSION=3D 10.26.64
DEVEL_PORTVERSION=3D 10.35.80
10.26.64 is the last of the 10.26 series and was released
almost exactly 18 months ago.
10.35.80 is the current "stable" version and was released=20
about 5 weeks ago. The port was updated the day following
the release.
>What's making things is worse is the fact that the netpbm
>ports don't include any documentation. Instead they refer
>to the online documentation which is way ahead of the
>state of the FreeBSD port, as explained above.
I agree this is annoying and don't understand the rationale behind the
way netpbm documentation is handled but that is not the FreeBSD
maintainer's fault.
>Is anybody working on updating the netpbm ports? Is there
>any problem with it that I'm not aware of?
A quick check would have identified the maintainer (now Cc'd).
--=20
Peter Jeremy
--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (FreeBSD)
iEYEARECAAYFAk2Sw18ACgkQ/opHv/APuIddiQCguYAextgNrHozlX0a7OohG0bi
zJ8AnAvnBVKcXkiHnjS+dk9dusQJSnsR
=Q/Ki
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--OXfL5xGRrasGEqWY--