From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Dec 19 15:10:38 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id PAA13600 for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:10:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA13592 Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:10:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199512192310.PAA13592@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-Warning: freefall.freebsd.org: Host localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports Tree Empty :-( In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 19 Dec 1995 14:41:41 CST." Date: Tue, 19 Dec 1995 15:10:34 -0800 From: "Justin T. Gibbs" Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org Precedence: bulk >I just extracted the RELENG_2_1_0 branch from the -cvs tree. >The ports tree comes up totally empty. >I do not think that this is appropriate. >The (-stable) branch which this represents SHOULD have a full tree of >ports, even if they are not as up-to-date as the (-current) branch. > >---- >Richard Wackerbarth >rkw@dataplex.net The ports tree was never tagged. I think the idea was that the -current ports tree would continue to work for 2.1 systems. If that is not the case, then we've screwed up. If/When we decide to do something that will break this functionality, we should tag the ports tree. -- Justin T. Gibbs =========================================== FreeBSD: Turning PCs into workstations ===========================================