Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 07:56:48 -0700 From: "Bruce A. Mah" <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Gregory Bond <gnb@itga.com.au> Cc: qa@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: some RC2 issues Message-ID: <200210031456.g93EumHf083929@intruder.bmah.org> In-Reply-To: <200210020804.SAA01314@lightning.itga.com.au> References: <200210020804.SAA01314@lightning.itga.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--==_Exmh_-2103240077P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii If memory serves me right, Gregory Bond wrote: > Some things I notice: > - The X stuff seems to have been compiled on 5.0 box, as the startup from th > e > X server says: > Release Date: 3 September 2002 > If the server is older than 6-12 months, or if your card is > newer than the above date, look for a newer version before > reporting problems. (See http://www.XFree86.Org/) > Build Operating System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT i386 [ELF] Hmmm...the i386 ports cluster machines *do* run 5-CURRENT kernels (because they need to make packages for both 4-STABLE and 5-CURRENT). But when they're building 4-STABLE packages, they run a 4-STABLE userland. I thought they were tweaked to lie about what OS version they were really running. It looks odd, but I don't *think* it should bother anything. This may be dependent on what mechanism a package uses to figure out the OS version. I checked a package for one of my own ports (net/ pchar) and it thought it had built on 4.7, which is what it should think. Bruce. --==_Exmh_-2103240077P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.5+ 20020506 iD8DBQE9nFqv2MoxcVugUsMRAnirAJwJnij4J2au4Nliic4htGA7K1guTgCfUPuW gZJ2VmWZPypfMvpFtYEn7zY= =a72H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_-2103240077P-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200210031456.g93EumHf083929>