Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2013 12:57:46 -0500 From: Fbsd8 <fbsd8@a1poweruser.com> To: Mark Felder <feld@feld.me> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: is csup broken? Message-ID: <50E4751A.2040501@a1poweruser.com> In-Reply-To: <20130102113813.2e9d42cf@tech304.office.supranet.net> References: <50E44EC9.6070301@a1poweruser.com> <20130102162025.d7ef8fd5.freebsd@edvax.de> <50E4539E.7050803@a1poweruser.com> <20130102164728.abc6cc34.freebsd@edvax.de> <50E45B78.5040609@a1poweruser.com> <20130102113813.2e9d42cf@tech304.office.supranet.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mark Felder wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 11:08:24 -0500 > fbsd8@a1poweruser.com wrote: > >> This 9.1 release was released prematurely. It has more problems >> them 5.0 had which had a re-release 2 weeks later to fix problems. > > This is FUD. Stop being afraid of change. > > Users use portsnap > Power users use svn > > There's no use trying to cover everyone's edge cases. You'll never keep everyone happy. > >> Now I just had a port I maintain committed yesterday >> and I have no way to test it to verify the port is working. > > Please don't commit ports to the ports tree if you have not tested them! > > Hay cutting out part of the post to make things look different than they are is just wrong. As the thread explains the situation which you conveniently cut out. If my words were not clear. My port works at my end, but I also check that the comment port process does not get kinked messing up the port at the ports system end.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50E4751A.2040501>