Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:35:52 +0200 From: Alson van der Meulen <alson+ml@alm.flutnet.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portmaster -R (Was: Re: HEADS-UP: Shared Library Versions bumped...) Message-ID: <20090729203552.GC2841@tafi.alm.flutnet.org> In-Reply-To: <4A70ACD2.6030804@FreeBSD.org> References: <1248027417.14210.110.camel@neo.cse.buffalo.edu> <200907232335.54973.mel.flynn%2Bfbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net> <4A6FF5FA.5010904@FreeBSD.org> <200907282342.25038.mel.flynn%2Bfbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net> <4A707534.8000808@FreeBSD.org> <20090729170601.GA2841@tafi.alm.flutnet.org> <4A709981.80600@FreeBSD.org> <20090729200013.GB2841@tafi.alm.flutnet.org> <4A70ACD2.6030804@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> [2009-07-29 22:10]: > I'm planning to remove the -u option altogether. It actually does very > little now, and certainly does not do what most users expect it should > do. Fine by me. I've never actually used -u, with -d (or the equivalent portmaster.rc setting) it's usually fine for unattended runs. The only annoyance is the question about building interactive ports that don't actually require any interaction (bacula comes to mind), since this is the only question in the config phase that's not cached, but this is probably the port maintainers fault for marking it interactive (it does remind me of "no keyboard present, press F1 to continue"). Alson
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090729203552.GC2841>