Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:01:42 -0800 From: moron <moron@industrial.org> To: freebsd-python@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problem upgrading to python-2.4.2 using port Message-ID: <200511121201.42877.moron@industrial.org> In-Reply-To: <4376486E.5010104@mac.com> References: <200511111214.42623.moron@industrial.org> <200511121119.16268.moron@industrial.org> <4376486E.5010104@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 12 November 2005 11:54, Chuck Swiger wrote: > cvsup'ing ports should have updated that file, yes. > > If you "cd /usr/ports" and run "make update", does it work? :-) > Show us the top of that command's output if it seems unusual...? Howdy. Well, it does not go very far: make update Error: Please define either SUP_UPDATE or CVS_UPDATE first. My normal routine is to run cvsup then if warranted, either upgrade individual ports or run portupgrade if I have done a major update. I have never ran a "make update" from the root of the port tree previously (at least not recently in any case). The non commented out lines in my supfile are: ------- *default host=cvsup2.FreeBSD.org *default base=/usr *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=. *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress ------ I've updating the ports tree using: cvsup -g -L 2 ports-supfile Is there any major difference between "make update" and running cvsup directly (as instructed to in the FreeBSD handbook)? Cheers -- ---> (culture) http://industrial.org : (label) http://deterrent.net ---> (community) http://ampfea.org : (hire me) http://codegrunt.com ---> (send EEEI news to) infosuck@industrial.org ---> Whomever dies with the most URLs wins!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200511121201.42877.moron>