Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 01:44:54 -0400 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> To: Jeremy Messenger <mezz7@cox.net> Cc: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading -CURRENT and will downgrade GNOME to 2.6... Message-ID: <1092721493.90464.40.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <opscsp4qwe9aq2h7@mezz> References: <opscqfb51e9aq2h7@mezz> <20040814173711.GY96458@toxic.magnesium.net> <opscqgt1kq9aq2h7@mezz> <20040814182634.GZ96458@toxic.magnesium.net><opscsp4qwe9aq2h7@mezz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-yXSqiyzRZajEeni/v9+p Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 2004-08-15 at 18:59, Jeremy Messenger wrote: > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 14:42:21 -0400, Joe Marcus Clarke =20 > <marcus@marcuscom.com> wrote: >=20 > > On Sat, 2004-08-14 at 14:26, Adam Weinberger wrote: > >> >> (08.14.2004 @ 1343 PST): Jeremy Messenger said, in 1.4K: << > >> > On Sat, 14 Aug 2004 13:37:11 -0400, Adam Weinberger =20 > >> <adamw@FreeBSD.org> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > >>>(08.14.2004 @ 1310 PST): Jeremy Messenger said, in 1.0K: << > >> > >>When I am done with the ruby-gtk2/gnome2 update, then do you want = =20 > >> me to > >> > >>test with gnome_upgrade.sh for GNOME 2.6 -> 2.7.x? Unless, it's =20 > >> already > >> > >>well tested by adamw and/or whomever. If nobody reply on this part= , > >> > >>then I > >> > >>will do the 'rm -rf /usr/local/* /usr/X11R6/* /compat/linux/* > >> > >>/var/db/pkg/*' and do the clean install instead gnome_upgrade.sh, > >> > >>because > >> > >>it is faster than portupgrade when do the big upgrade. > >> > >>>end of "Upgrading -CURRENT and will downgrade GNOME to 2.6..." fr= om > >> > >>>Jeremy Messenger << > >> > > > >> > >I run full gnome_upgrade.sh upgrades every 2 or 3 days or so, > >> > >alternating between 4.x and 5.x. > >> > > >> > Isn't it why your machine has died from that? Poor your dear machine= . =20 > >> ;-) > >> > >> Hehehehehe! I do those runs on the jails that Joe set up for me. > >> > >> > >Unless there are errors, I run in the following order: > >> > >* clean 2.6 install > >> > >* clean 2.7 install > >> > >* clean 2.7-experimental install > >> > >* 2.6 -> 2.7 upgrade run > >> > >on 5-CURRENT and then 4-STABLE. > >> > > >> > package or ports or both? If you haven't test with package, then I =20 > >> can do > >> > it here at the same time test by run desktop to see if it functions = =20 > >> fine. > >> > >> Only ports. > > > > We need to be more aggressive in testing packages since that's what wil= l > > give us the edge with attracting new users, as well as give us a good > > first impression when it comes to review time. Since 5.3-RELEASE is > > coming soon, we need to be very sure our packages do the right thing. > > You can expect Eugenia to rake us over the coals in a review otherwise. > > > > That said, I have done a GNOME 2.7 package install a few times with goo= d > > success. I haven't gotten any feedback on the 2.6 packages good or > > otherwise. Hopefully that means they work. >=20 > It seems like I am not able to upgrade 2.6.x to 2.7.x package, because th= e =20 > packages of MarcusCom aren't sync with MarcusCom CVS's ports tree. The =20 > portupgrade depend on ports tree for read the version, then grab the =20 > version of packages to upgrade. Yeah, I thought some of the packages would still apply, though. Joe >=20 > Cheers, > Mezz >=20 > > Joe > > > >> > >> # Adam > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Adam Weinberger > >> adamw@magnesium.net || adamw@FreeBSD.org > >> adamw@vectors.cx || adamw@gnome.org > >> http://www.vectors.cx --=20 PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc --=-yXSqiyzRZajEeni/v9+p Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBIZtVb2iPiv4Uz4cRAtitAJ9GgXAGx9/hqtFUkBBHudf4NqmvWwCfVb0F PGE4uJqxeuf3/7t7NXgKmjk= =gOLV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-yXSqiyzRZajEeni/v9+p--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1092721493.90464.40.camel>