Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:27:47 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: bootiack@yahoo.com Cc: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: section 4.5.1 Message-ID: <20081219192747.1edea542.trhodes@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <329017.49550.qm@web110608.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <329017.49550.qm@web110608.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
On Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:28:55 -0800 (PST)
G <bootiack@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was schooled in IRC about how 'portsnap fetch update' is the best way to update ports, not 'portsnap update' as listed in section 4.5.1. Perhaps that section could be changed to 'portsnap fetch update'.
>
> Just an idea.
> thx
Looking at my local source, I am unable to find an actual
"portsnap update" in the section; however, I have appened the
following to the end of that section:
<para>To run both processes consecutively, issue the following
command:</para>
<screen>&prompt.root; <userinput>portsnap fetch update</userinput></screen>
This change is in my local tree and should go in later on
this week. Thanks,
--
Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081219192747.1edea542.trhodes>