Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:05:09 +0100 From: Godwin Stewart <gstewart@bonivet.net> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Xorg 6.8.1 Message-ID: <20050226130509.39e109e9.gstewart@bonivet.net> In-Reply-To: <200502262225.24444.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> References: <20050226110651.0a20301b.gstewart@bonivet.net> <200502262225.24444.doconnor@gsoft.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 22:25:24 +1030, "Daniel O'Connor" <doconnor@gsoft.com.au> wrote: > You don't need to update a port just because it depends on Xorg. The X > API is quite stable so you can update just Xorg without expecting any > problems. (I did XFree86 -> Xorg with zero problems for example) No, the problem's the other way round. Every time I want to portupgrade something else, portupgrade also wants to upgrade Xorg. I don't want the latest Xorg after the horror stories I heard. That's why I'm building firefox-1.0.1 independently of the ports system, so that I don't have to go through the pain of upgrading Xorg (on which firefox depends, naturally) as well. Now, if I could be certain that Xorg has settled down, I wouldn't mind upgrading from 6.7.0 to 6.8.1 and have done with it. - --=20 G. Stewart - gstewart@bonivet.net The average nutritional value of promises is roughly zero. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCIGX1K5oiGLo9AcYRAnxVAKCMuYMlZxaqjrqCUI1eKxJC/9QN5gCgqpKD sOKB6hFwBJ1BdY42Zi3ItuA=3D =3D6QjU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050226130509.39e109e9.gstewart>