Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 23:36:49 +0200 From: Heino Tiedemann <rotkaps_spam_trap@gmx.de> To: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why there is a newer OOo port than the binary? Message-ID: <h4g3u3-tp1.ln1@news.t-online.com> References: <p2b0u3-ui41.ln1@news.t-online.com> <200609171720.59091.nb_root@videotron.ca> <i473u3-2c1.ln1@news.t-online.com> <200609181516.05432.nb_root@videotron.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nicolas Blais <nb_root@videotron.ca> wrote: >> Okay, I Understand. >> >> But, it is not good, to put rel-candidates into the stable tree. >> Maybe another port subtree is the solution? At least your explanation >> sounds like.. >> >> Maybe >> >> editors/openoffice.org-2.0-rc OR >> editors/openoffice.org-2.0-milestones >> >> Please anderstand also my point of view: I never can do "portupgrade >> -a", because of the "outdated" OOo-Port (I do not like to kompile >> OOo. It takes to much time, and several times it has failed). >> >> Heino > > I don't like compiling OO either :) But you do ;-) > Have you tried the -x option ? You can portupgrade everything but exclude > openoffice like so: > > portupgrade -avx openoffice Oh, cool. My port is named "de-openoffice..." so thats the name for the -x option? Heino
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?h4g3u3-tp1.ln1>