Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 12 Apr 2012 11:03:09 +0200
From:      Joel Dahl <joel@vnode.se>
To:        Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com>
Cc:        doc@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: "Doing the deed" on portupgrade
Message-ID:  <20120412090309.GK26895@goofy01.vnodelab.local>
In-Reply-To: <CADLo839V4BtuRF-ze6qS3xvU1kYsi_7KoChP7WFaYx5D59oZBA@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CADLo839V4BtuRF-ze6qS3xvU1kYsi_7KoChP7WFaYx5D59oZBA@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12-04-2012  8:26, Chris Rees wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> Even since its deprecation, portupgrade has proven to be very popular
> with newcomers, which I might be inclined to blame on the fact that
> the Handbook lists it first.
> 
> Two patches:
> 
> http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/patches/move-portupgrade.diff -- move
> the portupgrade section to the bottom
> 
> http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/patches/deprecate-portupgrade.diff --
> add a note to suggest it's a bad idea to use it.
> 
> Rendered at http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/rendered/portupgrade.html
> 
> Thoughts?  Anyone want to risk approving it?

Good idea. I'd like to see Portmaster first in the list though, and not
Portmanager.

-- 
Joel



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120412090309.GK26895>