Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 16:52:34 -0600 From: Pat Maddox <pergesu@gmail.com> To: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Installing portupgrade without X.org Message-ID: <810a540e05040915526751b184@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <slrnd5gf82.1nb0.use-reply-to@gnezdov.net> References: <8953a1db05040904263a1e2a79@mail.gmail.com> <20050409165612.GA91236@noisy.compsoc.man.ac.uk> <slrnd5gf82.1nb0.use-reply-to@gnezdov.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The only thing that matters is that WITHOUT_X11 is defined. The value itself doesn't matter. On Apr 9, 2005 2:37 PM, Sergei Gnezdov <use-reply-to@gnezdov.net> wrote: > On 2005-04-09, Lewis Thompson <lewiz@compsoc.man.ac.uk> wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 12:26:48PM +0100, Paul Waring wrote: > >> I'm currently trying to get portupgrade onto my new FreeBSD system by > >> running make install clean from /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade (after > >> doing a recent cvsup). Everything seems to go along fine, it starts > >> fetching all the packages it requires and then suddenly I see a > >> download for X.org. > > > > It is not portupgrade that needs X but a dependent port. Which specific > > port? In general just with WITHOUT_X11=1 to /etc/make.conf. > > I think it is > > WITHOUT_X11="YES" > > Does it make any difference? > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?810a540e05040915526751b184>