From owner-cvs-all Sun Mar 25 9:24: 0 2001 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4926A37B71A; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:23:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f2PHNs349815; Sun, 25 Mar 2001 19:23:54 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Steve Kargl Cc: Brian Somers , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/etc/periodic/weekly 400.status-pkg In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 25 Mar 2001 09:20:45 -0800." <20010325092045.A24469@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 19:23:54 +0200 Message-ID: <49813.985541034@critter> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20010325092045.A24469@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Steve Kargl wr ites: >On Sun, Mar 25, 2001 at 03:35:23AM -0800, Brian Somers wrote: >> brian 2001/03/25 03:35:23 PST >> >> Modified files: >> etc/periodic/weekly 400.status-pkg >> Log: >> Identify obsolete ports >> > >Is this really a good idea? I have 29 ports that are >considered obsolete on my system. One of those 29 >is png-1.0.8. If I blindly update png, do I then >need to update all the ports that depend on png: Despite all the good things one can say about our ports system, I don't think anyone should do anything "blindly" to their installed ports. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message