p5-ack renamed ack, no entry in UPDATING

[Eitan Adler]

On 14 January 2013 14:04, Vick Khera <vivek at khera.org> wrote:
> My apologies. I use portmaster. I don't know why I typed portupgrade in that
> original message. Looking at the history file from my shell I see
> "portmaster -o textproc/ack p5-ack-1.96_1" was used to correct the fact that
> p5-ack was leftover after a "portmaster -a" run.
>
> I agree duplicating the info in UPDATING would be unnecessary. I did not
> have it in my procedures to look into MOVING. I will do that from now on.

This should not be required. MOVING is designed for machines to read,
not humans.  IMHO portmaster should remove the old version (at least
if given an appropriate flag).


-- 
Eitan Adler