Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:02:49 +0530 From: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> To: Kent Stewart <kstewart@3-cities.com> Cc: Gunnar H Reichert-Weygold <gunnar@paganlibrary.com>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ports: any difference between 3.x/4.0? Message-ID: <20000426140248.A1104@physics.iisc.ernet.in> In-Reply-To: <39067736.C453940F@3-cities.com>; from kstewart@3-cities.com on Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 09:57:26PM -0700 References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10004251520180.11052-100000@mail.telestream.com> <00042518315401.00333@gunnar.my.domain> <20000426074930.B570@physics.iisc.ernet.in> <39067736.C453940F@3-cities.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks for the answer. Glad that the problems I saw weren't the only ones which exist and I can look forward to more :-) Yes, ports are a lifesaver. I don't think anything else I've seen comes close, certainly not RPM's. > The changes that they made to the Makefiles in the ports left a number > broken for a short time. Your port setup could be out of step with the > ports themselves. The "cvs commits" to fix the new Makefile structure > have pretty much died off recently. My ports tree is updated quite regularly, so I don't think that's the problem. I was just wondering whether there were two ports trees, one for 3.4 and one for 4.0, like there are several source trees. It seems that is not the case. In that case I'm surprised by how well things actually work: in linux, for instance, lots of things tend to get broken after a major upgrade. Rahul. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000426140248.A1104>