Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 12:09:05 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: Anatoly Karp <karp@math.wisc.edu> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Q] ports vs ports-stable Message-ID: <20010202120905.B89998@rapier.smartspace.co.za> In-Reply-To: <200102020603.f12632p34934@tolik.localdomain>; from karp@math.wisc.edu on Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 12:03:02AM -0600 References: <200102020603.f12632p34934@tolik.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri 2001-02-02 (00:03), Anatoly Karp wrote: > Hello all, > > I am tracking -STABLE sources branch, but being > relatively new to FreeBSD I am somewhat confused > about a sound ports tracking strategy. Namely, > > 1) is it true that, at any given moment, > a particular port may not work properly > (on a -STABLE box)? > > 2) if so, is there a way for me to adjust > my "ports-supfile" to only track "stable" > ports? > > (in particluar, I noticed the existence of > > ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/ports-stable/ > > - is this what I want?) As to 1, yes, it's possible a port may not work properly. It isn't particularly common. As to 2, no, there is only one ports collection which you can cvsup. And no, you don't want that. If you want packages, there're generally packages of currently non-building ports from previous package runs available. pkg_add -r will automagically find the right package for your system. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@mithrandr.moria.org 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?20010202120905.B89998>