From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 1 01:57:04 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C190816A420 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:57:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E49A43D48 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:57:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from frontend1.internal (mysql-sessions.internal [10.202.2.149]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65636D3377C for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:57:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.151]) by frontend1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:57:01 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: BLrT3aR9jnrhxCbqV47X793EiVF76P2oNNx5LFZg4Rqa 1138759020 Received: from gumby.localdomain (88-104-192-207.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com [88.104.192.207]) by frontend2.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 495D057146C for ; Tue, 31 Jan 2006 20:57:00 -0500 (EST) From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 01:56:55 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <93676E29-4F0E-40DC-904C-225A859D0B78@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <93676E29-4F0E-40DC-904C-225A859D0B78@u.washington.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200602010156.57750.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Subject: Re: Standard way of updating 6.x ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 01:57:04 -0000 On Tuesday 31 January 2006 17:45, Garrett Cooper wrote: > On Jan 31, 2006, at 8:31 AM, Xn Nooby wrote: > portupgrade: Use for updating your actual ports programs. > > There may be a more elegant solution though and I would be more than > happy to hear it too :). > -Garrett I find that portmanager generally does a better job at keeping ports up to date without manual intervention. A notable example being its ability to upgrade Gnome without the help of a script.