address feedback

address feedback

added a newline @brueffer

add exim path for ports

address comments

Since the working is being discussed, I chose a different path as I felt the statement was rather wordy. I attempted to tighten it.

address comments

This can be addressed with other content update, in my opinion. I would like to change the wording of the new content, but then go back and address other content.

It also seems odd to me that we are mentioning the "package from ports"... ports are not packages, and packages are not ports, but you need ports to make packages :)

I thought I would be addressing this, but looks like others are now looking into it, as well? I'm not sure what the status of this is now....

I believe what this is trying to address, though, is respecting a library choice between BASE vs. PORT/PKG throughout the build process. The way it is now, I don't believe that is accomplished.

In D5118#108942, @wblock wrote:

address comments

The procedure was tested as part of the documentation change.

addressed comments from Warren for Hungarian and Netherlands builds

Any comments, thoughts, suggestions on this review?
Thanks. -jgh

I understand, however it is unfortunate as I am finding all of the security bulletins, so far, in place in the new location.

I'll reach out to them.

Upon doing more research, I found the company is now Teklinks.
Updated diff.

Looks good to me. If it passes qa and build, go ahead with the commit.

It is noted in the bug title, itself.
"Fixed documentation grammar"

updating style per request

addressed concern

this article is gone as of r46450

i wasn't see my new diff. so uploaded, again.

address comments.