Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 06:49:35 -0400 From: Gerard Seibert <gerard@seibercom.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports manager vs. portupgrade Message-ID: <20051029064707.8641.GERARD@seibercom.net> In-Reply-To: <07d601c5dc20$6ea97270$37cba1cd@emerytelcom.com> References: <07d601c5dc20$6ea97270$37cba1cd@emerytelcom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, October 28, 2005 8:33:50 PM, "Elliot Finley" <efinleywork@efin= ley.com> Subject: ports manager vs. portupgrade Wrote these words of wisdom: > pros and cons anyone? >=20 > I've always used portupgrade and it works pretty well, but I'm curious = as to > how ports manager compares. >=20 > Elliot >=20 ***** REPLY SEPARATOR ***** On 10/11/2005 5:29:42 PM, Gerard Replied: This is only my own opinion, but I find it does a better, more complete job, without the hassle of creating Indexes, etc. Portmanager does not use the indexes that portupgrade does, and therefore is not hampered by them if they become corrupt, etc. --=20 A: Because it reverses the natural flow of a dialog. Q: Why is top posting undesirable when replying? TOPIC: Posting Etiquet
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051029064707.8641.GERARD>