On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Tim Vanderhoek wrote: > Something of this general idea exists in the portcheckout port. If we were to have a stripped down skeleton of the ports, is it generally felt that the INDEX contains enough information? Or do we really need to have the DESCRiptions available for browsing before we go online to actually fetch the required files? -- Richard Wackerbarth [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Christopher Masto
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Donn Miller
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Matthew Dillon
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Jeffrey J. Mountin
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Matthew Dillon
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Jeffrey J. Mountin
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Matthew Dillon
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? John Polstra
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Jeffrey J. Mountin
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Tim Vanderhoek
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Richard Wackerbarth
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Tim Vanderhoek
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? David Scheidt
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Kris Kennaway
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Leif Neland
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? John Polstra
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Udo Schweigert
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Szilveszter Adam
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Leif Neland
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Jeffrey J. Mountin
- Re: /usr/ports/ too big? Peter Jeremy