From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 5 15:25:09 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A121016A552 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:25:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from out3.smtp.messagingengine.com (out3.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28BF343D46 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:25:09 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from frontend3.internal (frontend3.internal [10.202.2.152]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C559ED697F8 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:25:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by frontend3.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 05 Jun 2006 11:25:10 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: 4pRwV7N814KvLbTED9KRpJpsHgYWD+yHHBjnaEX4wc9Y 1149521109 Received: from bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk (bb-87-81-140-128.ukonline.co.uk [87.81.140.128]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9322A24C0 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2006 11:25:09 -0400 (EDT) From: RW To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 16:24:41 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200606051625.03314.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Subject: Re: Just a ports related question X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 15:25:13 -0000 On Friday 02 June 2006 16:23, Achilleus Mantzios wrote: > O Kris Kennaway =DD=E3=F1=E1=F8=E5 =F3=F4=E9=F2 Jun 2, 2006 : > > On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 04:42:28PM +0300, Achilleus Mantzios wrote: > > > Anyway, since the tag for ports is ".", (and it is a substantial > > > property of the ports system, i.e. not following RELEASES and branche= s, > > > but evolving on their own), would not it make more sense to arrange > > > for packages in > > > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6.1-release/ > > > to progressively match those of > > > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-6.1-stable? > > > > Please give us about 30 new i386/amd64/sparc64/ia64 machines first, > > thanks :-) > > Just some notes: > > 1) Whould it take 30 new i386/amd64/sparc64/ia64 machines > to just copy packages from > /ports/i386/packages-6-stable > to > /ports/i386/packages-6.1-release Not everyone regards having their packages completely up-to-date as an end = in=20 itself. For them the current situation is actually quite sensible. The=20 packages in "packages-6.1-release" and on the CD are all built from the sa= me=20 snapshot of the ports tree. And that snapshot is taken at a time when a=20 particular effort is being made not to break anything.=20 If "packages-6.1-release" were kept up-to-date with ports, a "pkg_add -r"=20 could bring in packages built many months after the those installed with th= e=20 release, and cause horrible dependency problems.=20 =20