From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 28 13:09:47 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50931065679 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:09:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lists@opsec.eu) Received: from home.opsec.eu (home.opsec.eu [IPv6:2001:14f8:200::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1A88FC2C for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:09:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pi by home.opsec.eu with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1N38Ha-000LuS-LR for ports@freebsd.org; Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:09:46 +0100 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 14:09:46 +0100 From: Kurt Jaeger To: ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20091028130946.GF93084@home.opsec.eu> References: <4AE79A4E.3070404@googlemail.com> <11167f520910271955q45c4109dqd2ada4959ce58db8@mail.gmail.com> <1e6df7760910280245y7717d74cn4cefc6a581c6260f@mail.gmail.com> <20091028134640.58eb3cb9@ernst.jennejohn.org> <1e6df7760910280556q3d9f0394t87b192fbbbf9adad@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1e6df7760910280556q3d9f0394t87b192fbbbf9adad@mail.gmail.com> Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: qtcreator-1.2.1: Not installable X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:09:47 -0000 Adrian Glaubitz wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Gary Jennejohn > wrote: > > The qtcreator port was created on May 7, 2009.  Seems to me that 7.2R > > is older than that.  Obviously, qtcreator can't exist for 7.2R if the > > port didn't exist when it was released. > > Well, ok. Seems another case of "different systems, different > philosophies" here for me. > > My idea was that I was downloading the latest STABLE release of > FreeBSD and I assumed that the ports directory always applies to the > current STABLE version, noone should use a development version for > daily use, should one. The ports tree is being mopped up for each release. The latest release was 7.2, so the latest ports tree known to be pretty consistent is the one with the CVS tag RELEASE_7_2_0. > Besides, the ports website doesn't list at all what versions of > FreeBSD include this port as opposed to Debian, for example; I don't > want to start a flamewar though. It's not really user-friendly, is it. One way to do this e.g. for port editors/openoffice.org-3/: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice.org-3/ and show only those with a certain tag: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/ports/editors/openoffice.org-3/?only_with_tag=RELEASE_7_2_0 -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 11 years to go !