> into FreeBSD, which I think is good.  I don't think my changes to the
> Message Digest stuff have been committed to FreeBSD yet, which is too
> bad; those changes are absolutely necessary for md[45] to work on
> 64-bit systems.

I think that's more oversight than anything - do you have a PR#?

> However, when I sent changes to the bsd.port*.mk files, they met with
> considerable resistance, and explanations about why I chose to do things
> they way I did them met with "well that doesn't fit with my view of

Well, now wait.  I remember the comments that were generated and
"considerable resistance" is not even close to what I'd call the small
debate we had - you want to see "considerable resistance" and I can
show you some transcripts of earlier debates that went on concerning
the merging of the various *BSD groups. :-) I remember some
discussion, a minor degree of push-back, some compromise solutions
being floated which _seemed_ to be more than acceptable to all
concerned, then silence.  I honestly perceived it to be apathy rather
than antipathy which was bogging this down until you spoke up here.

> I guess some of these things got resolved, until I was basically told
> that it was pointless, since most of the patches in the `ports' collection
> use #ifdef __FreeBSD__ ... Unfortunately, I haven't had any time to
> pursue it further, lately.

Well, it's not *pointless*, just perhaps a little harder than you'd
thought.  You also shouldn't shoot the messengers just because we had the
temerity to point out our perhaps over-liberal use of __FreeBSD__. :-)

> So, you could say that I'm mildly annoyed at the fact that I made
> several of these changes, and fed them back to FreeBSD, where they
> met with some resistance, and now very similar changes (made by someone
> else) are called the right thing to do.

FWIW, I've never seen anything submitted back from OpenBSD WRT the
ports collection, so I wasn't even calling them "the right thing to
do" in any truly concrete sense (I could call your stuff the same but
not commit the patches and that wouldn't be much of an endorsement at
all, now would it? ;).

AFAIK, the whole question of your patches remains _open_, not closed,
and I don't think I was being unfair at all in mentioning the OpenBSD
stuff - it was merely that, a mention, and no one has suggested that
their ARCH stuff is better than your ARCH stuff.  Let's just get some
concensus on the friggin' ARCH stuff and work with Satoshi [the
FreeBSD portsmeister, for those who don't know the name] in getting it
committed.  He's a reasonable guy, and you don't _need_ concensus from
everyone in FreeBSD-ports so much as you simply need it from him.
He's already said that he'd be happy with anything which doesn't make
his job harder.

					Jordan