since they always need a C compiler, even when the source code is
completely in C++.
For some other packages, stated in the comment that a C compiler is
really not needed.
developer is officially maintaining the package.
The rationale for changing this from "tech-pkg" to "pkgsrc-users" is
that it implies that any user can try to maintain the package (by
submitting patches to the mailing list). Since the folks most likely
to care about the package are the folks that want to use it or are
already using it, this would leverage the energy of users who aren't
developers.
in the process. (More information on tech-pkg.)
Bump PKGREVISION and BUILDLINK_DEPENDS of all packages using libtool and
installing .la files.
Bump PKGREVISION (only) of all packages depending directly on the above
via a buildlink3 include.
curses.buildlink2.mk. This was wrong because we _really_ do want to
express that we want _n_curses when we include the buildlink2.mk file.
We should have a better way to say that the NetBSD curses doesn't
quite work well enough. In fact, it's far better to depend on ncurses
by default, and exceptionally note when it's okay to use NetBSD curses
for specific packages. We will look into this again in the future.
