On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 03:14:30AM -0800, Johnny C. Lam wrote:
> > These packages should just add the ncurses/buildlink2.mk, that's all that's
> > needed. After it is fixed, of course :)
> 
> I disagree.  I don't want to go around adding ncurses/buildlink2.mk to
> Makefiles of packages that just need curses, because those packages simply
> don't need ncurses, and it's misleading.

You seem to be attaching to much to a name.
So let's just assume we move ncurses/buildlink2.mk to mk/curses.mk and
include that as I proposed -- what's the problem then?
 Thomas