From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 14 09:10:37 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 009A616A4CE
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:10:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (conn.mc.mpls.visi.com [208.42.156.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FB7743D62
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2004 09:10:25 -0800 (PST)	(envelope-from veldy@veldy.net)
Received: from veldy.net (fuggle.veldy.net [209.98.200.33])
	by conn.mc.mpls.visi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id B220D8919; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:10:24 -0600 (CST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.veldy.net [127.0.0.1])
	by veldy.net (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 4A3E91CC86; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:10:24 -0600 (CST)
Received: from veldy.net ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (fuggle.veldy.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id 27860-03; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:10:19 -0600 (CST)
Received: from 4K3500B (localhost.veldy.net [127.0.0.1])
	by veldy.net (Postfix) with SMTP
	id 5810A1CC83; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:10:19 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <00c901c3dac1$4a087f40$d037630a@nic.target.com>
From: "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy@veldy.net>
To: <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>,
	"Pete French" <petefrench@keithprowse.com>
References: <E1AgoC5-000Jwa-O6@dilbert.firstcallgroup.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:10:16 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at veldy.net
Subject: Re: ANy difference between 5.X ports tree and 4.X ports tree ?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 17:10:37 -0000

Pete French wrote:
> As I understand it, the ports tree is the same for both STABLE and
> CURRENT isnt it ? So can I safely do a cvsup with the line
> 
> ports-all tag=RELEASE_5_2_0
> 
> to update my ports collection to the set which comes with 5.2
> release, despite the fact I am running 4.9 ? I want to do this
> as I know the sets of ports which are marked for a RELEASE are
> tested to all work together, which saves some of the problems I
> sometimes get cvsupping at an arbitrary time.
> 
> The only reason I ask is that I ran the above command and it looked
> like it altered almost every port in the tree!
> 
> -pcf.

No.  Use

tag = .