Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 09:00:48 -0700 From: milki <milki@rescomp.berkeley.edu> To: Eric <freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> Cc: ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: making Ruby 1.9 default Message-ID: <20110316160048.GM32667@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <C9A64EB6.1DFF2%freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com> References: <1300272269.1973.16.camel@localhost> <C9A64EB6.1DFF2%freebsdlists-ruby@chillibear.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11:25 Wed 16 Mar , Eric wrote: > There are plenty of outstanding PRs regarding portupgrade, which does seem > to suffer from being both loved and unloved (in terms of maintenance). I > personally use it, but am wondering if it's time to switch to Doug's > PortMaster now... However given that portupgrade is often noted in > documentation as almost the default tool for doing upgrades of ports then it > does seem sensible that we should all try our best to fix it. I've been hanging out at #bsdports@efnet and I've gathered that is the consensus of committers that portupgrade is no longer maintained and portmaster is the preferred tool. The docs need some patching to reflect this. -- milki
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110316160048.GM32667>