On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 15:04:07 -0700 Chad Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2007 at 09:43:16PM +0000, RW wrote: > > On Thu, 15 Nov 2007 16:00:55 -0500 > > Chuck Robey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I've already deleted the message that kicked me off, but it > > > looked to me that you were talking about the 10,000 ports I was > > > talking about, and that meant you were referring to new installs, > > > not upgrades. > > > > Why would anyone want to configure ports they don't want to > > install? > > I've been following this discussion without participating, but I have > a question: > > How does that question follow from the preceding, quoted statement? > I assumed that he meant all ports, 10,000 is of the same order of magnitude as the total number of ports (27000), but an absurdly high figure for a real system. Actually the total number of ports in the entire tree that support options is only 1447. And out of 821 ports installed on my KDE desktop machine only 140 do. The idea that anyone ever has to configure 10,000 ports is nonsense. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
