Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 22:02:23 -0600 From: Jon Noack <noackjr@alumni.rice.edu> To: W C <woodycarey@hotmail.com> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs tag for -STABLE for ports-supfile ? use HEAD or ??? Message-ID: <421D51CF.5030603@alumni.rice.edu> In-Reply-To: <BAY102-F344206771480F711F4C7F0C9640@phx.gbl> References: <BAY102-F344206771480F711F4C7F0C9640@phx.gbl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/23/05 21:55, W C wrote: > I just (successfully) upgraded my remote 5.2.1 box to 5.3-STABLE Feb 22 > 05 with the usual > buildworld > buildkernel > installkernel > mergemaster > reboot > installworld > mergemaster > reboot > etc. > > I want to upgrade my ports tree to that which is correct for -STABLE. > Is there a ports-STABLE cvs tag I can use, or is it safe to just use > HEAD, as is in the stock supfile? Using the stock ports-supfile (tag=.) is fine. The ports tree does not have versions; the ports system is version-aware so the same port will work correctly across the board (at least, that's the idea ;-). Jon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?421D51CF.5030603>