From owner-freebsd-ports Tue Jan 2 4:37:11 2001 From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 2 04:37:08 2001 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk (probity.mcc.ac.uk [130.88.200.94]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB8537B400; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 04:37:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org ([130.88.200.97]) by probity.mcc.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.05 #4) id 14DQgd-0003yp-00; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:37:07 +0000 Received: (from jcm@localhost) by dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f02Cb6A26562; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:37:06 GMT (envelope-from jcm) Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:37:06 +0000 From: j mckitrick To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: licq package will not install Message-ID: <20010102123706.A26527@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello, here is something I do not understand about the ports system. On my packages CD, licq is nowhere to be found, but it is in the ports tree. Using an ftp site, it is also not listed is the packages index, but it is in the ports. Trying to install with '-r' does not work, of course. Is licq not being built each night with the rest of the tree? I *could* use the port, but binary only is *so* much faster, and less strain on my system. jm -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jonathon McKitrick -- jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org They laugh because I'm different. I laugh because they're all the same. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message