Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2005 16:39:20 -0800 (PST) From: "Freddie Cash" <fcash-ml@sd73.bc.ca> To: "Godwin Stewart" <gstewart@bonivet.net> Cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Xorg 6.8.1 Message-ID: <60718.24.71.128.63.1109551160.squirrel@24.71.128.63> In-Reply-To: <20050226130509.39e109e9.gstewart@bonivet.net> References: <20050226110651.0a20301b.gstewart@bonivet.net> <200502262225.24444.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20050226130509.39e109e9.gstewart@bonivet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> No, the problem's the other way round. Every time I want to > portupgrade something else, portupgrade also wants to upgrade Xorg. I > don't want the latest Xorg after the horror stories I heard. > That's why I'm building firefox-1.0.1 independently of the ports > system, so that I don't have to go through the pain of upgrading Xorg > (on which firefox depends, naturally) as well. The simple solution to this is to not use the -r or -R switch with portupgrade. :) Just use "portupgrade firefox" and it won't try to upgrade Xorg on you. I have yet to see a simple "portupgrade <portname>" try to upgrade anything other than <portname>. > Now, if I could be certain that Xorg has settled down, I wouldn't > mind upgrading from 6.7.0 to 6.8.1 and have done with it. I've been using Xorg 6.8.1 since a week after it hit the ports tree. First on 5.3-RELEASE and then on 6-CURRENT (same laptop). No problems here. -- Freddie Cash, CCNT CCLP Helpdesk / Network Support Tech. School District 73 (250) 377-HELP [377-4357] fcash@sd73.bc.ca helpdesk@sd73.bc.ca
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?60718.24.71.128.63.1109551160.squirrel>