On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 01:25:09PM -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> I want to DEPRECATE security/barnyard. It's a master port. The slave
> is security/barnyard-sguil. Is it sufficient to DEPRECATE and EXPIRE
> the master? Or do I need to do that to the slave as well?
Master should be enough.
-- W
I want to DEPRECATE security/barnyard. It's a master port. The slave is
security/barnyard-sguil. Is it sufficient to DEPRECATE and EXPIRE the master?
Or do I need to do that to the slave as well?
--
Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst
As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions
are my own
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Freddie Cash wrote:
>
> However, as a user of portmaster, I would like to say that just
> because portupgrade (or portmanager, or port-tool-of-the-month) has a
> specific feature, doesn't mean it absolutely needs to be added to
> portmaster.
>
Agreed.
> Pe
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Mike Jakubik
wrote:
> On 8/12/2010 5:32 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Mike Jakubik wrote:
>>
>>> I tried portmaster for myself and im wondering how to get the
>>> functionality of "portupgrade lib\*", meaning update all libraries
>>> that need u
On 8/12/2010 5:32 PM, Doug Barton wrote:
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Mike Jakubik wrote:
I tried portmaster for myself and im wondering how to get the
functionality of "portupgrade lib\*", meaning update all libraries
that need updating. With "portmaster lib\*" it tries to update and
rebuild all libra
Just curious, is it really true that portupgrade is "abandonware" ?
I think I have seen some updates to it on the ports tree in the last
six months ...
thanks,
-Ed.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Sandra Kachelmann
wrote:
> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
> star
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 02:04:56 -0700 Doug Barton wrote:
> On 08/13/2010 02:03, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > Yes, I do define it at /etc/make.conf:
> > -
> > # grep PORTSDIR /etc/make.conf
> > PORTSDIR= /m/ports
> Ok, there's your problem. Remove that and you're good to go.
The prob
On 08/13/2010 02:03, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Yes, I do define it at /etc/make.conf:
> -
> # grep PORTSDIR /etc/make.conf
> PORTSDIR= /m/ports
Ok, there's your problem. Remove that and you're good to go.
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 13:00:49 +0400 Boris Samorodov wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:51:07 -0700 Doug Barton wrote:
> > On 08/13/2010 00:26, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > -
> > > # portmaster --version
> > >
> > > ===>>> Version 3.0
> > > # portmaster tmux
> > >
> > > ===>>>
On Fri, 13 Aug 2010 01:51:07 -0700 Doug Barton wrote:
> On 08/13/2010 00:26, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > -
> > # portmaster --version
> >
> > ===>>> Version 3.0
> > # portmaster tmux
> >
> > ===>>> Currently installed version: tmux-1.2_1
> > ===>>> Port directory: /usr/ports/s
On 08/13/2010 00:26, Boris Samorodov wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> -
> # portmaster --version
>
> ===>>> Version 3.0
> # portmaster tmux
>
> ===>>> Currently installed version: tmux-1.2_1
> ===>>> Port directory: /usr/ports/sysutils/tmux
>
> ===>>> Gathering distinfo list for installed ports
>
> ==
Am 12.08.2010, 15:11 Uhr, schrieb Matthias Andree:
Warren Block wrote on 2010-08-01:
xz(1) has a built-in protective notion about limiting memory usage that
prevents port building on relatively low-memory computers. Users have
experienced this in the wild[1].
Matthias Andree pointed out[
Hi All,
-
# portmaster --version
===>>> Version 3.0
# portmaster tmux
===>>> Currently installed version: tmux-1.2_1
===>>> Port directory: /usr/ports/sysutils/tmux
===>>> Gathering distinfo list for installed ports
===>>> Launching 'make checksum' for sysutils/tmux in background
===>>> Ga
13 matches
Mail list logo