Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:29:44 +0200 (SST) From: Peter Olsson <pol@leissner.se> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> Cc: Funn Dipp <isetr0@sevicron.com>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What has happened to the ports system??? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0010100915070.25721-100000@nic-i.leissner.se> In-Reply-To: <14818.18678.862861.419111@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
First, portcheckout always updates ports/Mk. Second, I run 4.1-RELEASE. Not current or stable. Do you mean that I shouldn't upgrade applications unless I upgrade the OS? Third, I have been subscribed to -stable for 12 hours now. A complete waste of bandwidth. I believe the same is true for most or all of the other lists. I will revert to only subscribing to -announce. And I still haven't got a good reason why this MAJOR CHANGE in the ports system wasn't posted to -announce. Peter Olsson On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Mike Meyer wrote: > Funn Dipp writes: > > A message was posted Friday I believe to the -current and -stable > > mailing lists that the ports system was getting restructured and > > therefore not to cvsup ports therefore risking an inconsistent tree. > > Further, an all clear message is to be sent out when the conversion > > is done. I haven't seen this message yet, but I cvsup'ed my ports > > (risky fool that I am) Sunday afternoon and it seemed to go ok - I > > noticed changes all the way down to x11-wm...so if they're going in > > alpha order, majority of changes appears have to been done. > > Please insert newlines in your email every 70 characters or > so. Failing not only leads to ugly mail, but risks violating the RFCs > for email. > > > I concur as to why there was no mention to -Announce - this is > > obviously something that affects more than those who like to wade > > through the other afore-mentioned lists. > > Well, anyone running -stable or -current are supposed be reading the > list that goes with it, as well as cvs-all. cvs-all is a mess, and > judicious filtering is definitely called for. But if you don't have > time to read those lists and find yourself in trouble because you > weren't reading them - you have no one to blame but yourself. If > you're trying to run bits and pieces of the ports tree - as opposed to > running complete snapshots, the way it's meant to be done - you should > be following -ports, with the same caveat. I don't, so I don't know if > it was mentioned there. > > > FYI - I use cvsup and the sample ports-supfile to update my ports - > > not sure what portcheckout is and/or how it works. My guess is that > > it just gets the specific port while my cvsup method synchronizes > > the entire tree which includes that bsd.port.mk file. One > > possibility is to use the ports-supfile sample and comment out > > ports-all and uncomment ports-base which, I believe, should get the > > necessary file. > > A "make search key=portcheckout" in /usr/ports turns up: > > guru$ make search key=portcheckout > Port: portcheckout-2.0 > Path: /usr/ports/devel/portcheckout > Info: Checkout and build ports and all depending ports > Maint: wosch@FreeBSD.org > Index: devel > B-deps: > R-deps: > > So it looks like you pegged it. Portcheckout is abusing the ports > tree, and I would expect a fair percentage of the changes in ports/Mk > to break one or more ports. Somone probably ought to ask the author to > add a check for Mk needing updating, and the ability to do so if it > needs it. > > <mike > > > aaaanyway - back to work for me, I guess ;-) Good luck. > > > > isetr0 > > > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2000 at 06:13:25PM +0200, Peter Olsson wrote: > > > What has happened to the ports system??? > > > > > > Today when I used portcheckout to get the squid-2.3 port and at the > > > same time updated ports/Mk, the ports system seemed to break. It > > > complains about the port using an old layout and that I should > > > update it to match bsd.port.mk. How do I update it? > > > > > > I have never had any problems with the ports system which is a superb > > > invention, but now I'm getting frustrated. > > > > > > And why has there been no mention of whatever problem it is on > > > FreeBSD-Announce? > > > And no thanks, I won't subscribe to any other mailing list than > > > FreeBSD-Announce. Flame me how much you want, but time is unfortunately too > > > precious a resource to spend on FreeBSD-questions. Which means that I would > > > appreciate if any replies to this email are directed to my email, not the list. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Peter Olsson pol@leissner.se > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0010100915070.25721-100000>