From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 3 04:56:53 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2FC16A4BF for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2003 04:56:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout.informatik.tu-muenchen.de (mailout.informatik.tu-muenchen.de [131.159.0.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C663E44003 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2003 04:56:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from barner@in.tum.de) Received: by zi025.glhnet.mhn.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2D1B1389AD; Wed, 3 Sep 2003 13:56:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 13:56:51 +0200 From: Simon Barner To: Stefan Malte Schumacher , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20030903115651.GC948@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> References: <20030903114303.GA14898@drachenhorst.fantasy.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PmA2V3Z32TCmWXqI" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030903114303.GA14898@drachenhorst.fantasy.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at informatik.tu-muenchen.de Subject: Re: Ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2003 11:56:53 -0000 --PmA2V3Z32TCmWXqI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, > I have a question concerning the ports : For my Base System I have decided > to stick with RELENG_5_1 as tag for my cvsup-supfile. Should there be any > problems if I use "." for the Ports-Collection ? I know what is the > difference between these tags when applied to the base system but what is > the difference when applied to the ports ? For the ports collection there is only one branch `.'. The ports support both FreeBSD -stable and -current, but if you are lucky, even older version might work (but they are not officially supported, and I remember a problem with one of the pkg_* tools that did not support a certian command line option). > And do I understand correctly that the state of my ports collection deter= mines which > version of a program I get when I type "make" and not the development sta= tus > of the software ? Yes, somebody needs to do the work and update the port to the lastest version of the programm. > (An Example would be : I have an old ports collection and built software > version > 0.13 from it. Now there is version 0.20 avaiable. Will "make" download and > build 0.13 or 0.20 ?) =20 It will build 0.13. You can try and update your ports collection and see if somebody has already done that work, or you could try it yourself: The porters' handbook might be a good start: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/ Regards, Simon --PmA2V3Z32TCmWXqI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE/VdcCCkn+/eutqCoRAo34AJ0cYjsEOyEiSpQa6jS0wtaRhmlODgCgreFh k1tzc5dN0qBO4o1FMXdP3Vk= =lPs9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --PmA2V3Z32TCmWXqI--