Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 13:20:47 +0200 (EET) From: Dmitry Pryanishnikov <dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua> To: stable@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20040116131248.G36380@atlantis.atlantis.dp.ua>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello! > Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 16:53:18 +0100 > From: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@FreeBSD.org> > > > freshly updated ports tree on a 4.9 box is exactly the same as a > > > freshly updated ports tree on a 5.2 box. > >=20 > > Read the users email. They're using specific tags, not "." so there are > > (or may be) some differences as time elapses. > > Users should not use tags for ports collection. It's > documentated also. Umm... What exactly is negative impact of using, for example, tag=RELEASE_5_2_0 for getting ports collection which came with 5.2-RELEASE via CVSup? Yes, I understand that I won't get fixes and improvements which came after ports tree freeze and creation of RELEASE_5_2_0 tag. I don't need them. What else should I be aware of? I've made it several times, then compared CVSupped ports tree against fresh one which came with 5.2-RELEASE - they are the same. Sincerely, Dmitry -- Atlantis ISP, System Administrator e-mail: dmitry@atlantis.dp.ua nic-hdl: LYNX-RIPE
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040116131248.G36380>