Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021, Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: From: Freddie Cash Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:26:29 -0800 /var/log/messages and I think /var/log/daemon include the output of the pkg commands. If you have the log files

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 03:23:57 +0900 (JST) Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: > From: Michael Gmelin > Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was > executed Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:05:57 +0100 > > > This will give you a list of all packages that were > >

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

From: Michael Gmelin Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:05:57 +0100 > This will give you a list of all packages that were updated/installed > last: > > pkg query -e %t=$(pkg query %t | sort -n | tail -n1) %n-%v

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 10:35:38 +0200 Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:57:22AM +0900, Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: > > From: Freddie Cash > > Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was > > executed Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:26:29 -0800

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 10:57:22AM +0900, Yasuhiro Kimura wrote: > From: Freddie Cash > Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:26:29 -0800 > > > /var/log/messages and I think /var/log/daemon include the

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

From: Freddie Cash Subject: Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 17:26:29 -0800 > /var/log/messages and I think /var/log/daemon include the output of the pkg > commands. If you have the log files backed up from the last time it was >

Re: List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

On Tue., Jan. 26, 2021, 5:18 p.m. Yasuhiro Kimura, wrote: > Hello, > > Is there any way to get the list of packages upgraded (and installed > as new dependency if there are) last time `pkg upgrade` was executed? > > Best Regards. > > --- > Yasuhiro Kimura > /var

List of packages upgraded last time `pkg upgrade` was executed

Hello, Is there any way to get the list of packages upgraded (and installed as new dependency if there are) last time `pkg upgrade` was executed? Best Regards. --- Yasuhiro Kimura ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

HINX OPTIONS_FILE_SET+=SPIDER I think all users of MariaDB 10.1 should be warned in UPDATING Let me know if you need some more details. Am I the only one beaten by this issue? I see this on each of our machines during pkg upgrade. Miroslav Lachman Hi Miroslav, Looks like it. My own servers

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

scratch65...@att.net wrote on 2017/04/19 17:55: [Default] On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 14:52:56 +0200, Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: I tried it on next machine with pkg upgrade -f but the result is the same: pkg check -Ba Checking all packages (p5-DBD-mysql-4.042) /usr/local/lib/perl

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

PTIONS_FILE_SET+=SPHINX OPTIONS_FILE_SET+=SPIDER I think all users of MariaDB 10.1 should be warned in UPDATING Let me know if you need some more details. Am I the only one beaten by this issue? I see this on each of our machines during pkg upgrade. Miroslav Lachman Hi Miroslav, Looks like it.

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

27;s quarterly version skew, and mariadb *seems* to be all there >>>> and working correctly. I haven't done any work yet this morning, >>>> so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. >>> >>> Do you use MariaDB version 10.1? >>> >>&

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

uot;ls: /usr/local/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient_r.so.18: No such file or directory" on each upgraded server until i run *pkg upgrade -f mariadb101-client* Yes, I do have that file. Could the difference in our results be due to my having used the -f switch, which forces upgrade of EVERYthing instead of j

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

t;Do you use MariaDB version 10.1? > >MariaDB server is running without problems, only some "mysql client" >libraries are missing, but if you use only PHP to connect to "mysql >server" then you will not notice any problem, because PHP uses internal >mysql client

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

and webserver was on separate machine - PHP website was still running. Can you check this? ls -l /usr/local/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient_r.so.18 I see "ls: /usr/local/lib/mysql/libmysqlclient_r.so.18: No such file or directory" on each upgraded server until i run *pkg upgrade -f mariadb1

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

[Default] On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 21:45:47 +0200, Miroslav Lachman <000.f...@quip.cz> wrote: >Miroslav Lachman wrote on 2017/03/31 15:31: >> I don't know if it was "pkg" fault or mariadb101-server and >> mariadb101-client conflict. >> >> I did standard "pkg upgrade" and at the end I have half files of

Re: databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

Miroslav Lachman wrote on 2017/03/31 15:31: I don't know if it was "pkg" fault or mariadb101-server and mariadb101-client conflict. I did standard "pkg upgrade" and at the end I have half files of mariadb101-client missing: # pkg check -Ba Checking all packages: ... pkg: fstat() failed for(/usr

databases/mariadb101-client upgraded in wrong order, resulted in missing files

I don't know if it was "pkg" fault or mariadb101-server and mariadb101-client conflict. I did standard "pkg upgrade" and at the end I have half files of mariadb101-client missing: # pkg check -Ba Checking all packages: ... pkg: fstat() failed for(/usr/local/bin/msql2mysql): No such file or d

Re: Upgraded

Hi! > I've just updated a port I maintain (gohugo) for the first time. > I've made changes to the Makefile, distinfo and pkg-plist files, > then made an svn diff and attached that to a bug > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213309 > Do I now just wait for a committer to review and

Upgraded

Afternoon all, I've just updated a port I maintain (gohugo) for the first time. I've made changes to the Makefile, distinfo and pkg-plist files, then made an svn diff and attached that to a bug (https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=213309

Re: GeForce GTX 750 Ti upgraded to unsupported

On 09/08/16 15:58, David Wolfskill wrote: On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 03:54:17PM -0700, Russell L. Carter wrote: Greetings, Since I upgraded to 11/stable from 10/stable, it appears that my video card is no longer supported by either nvidia-driver or nvidia-driver-340: ... Any ideas? Thanks

Re: GeForce GTX 750 Ti upgraded to unsupported

On Thu, 8 Sep 2016 15:54:17 -0700 Russell L. Carter wrote: > Greetings, > > Since I upgraded to 11/stable from 10/stable, it appears that my video > card is no longer supported by either nvidia-driver or > nvidia-driver-340: > > 77.208] (WW) NV: Ignoring unsupported dev

Re: GeForce GTX 750 Ti upgraded to unsupported

On Friday, 9 September 2016, Russell L. Carter wrote: > Greetings, > > Since I upgraded to 11/stable from 10/stable, it appears that my video > card is no longer supported by either nvidia-driver or nvidia-driver-340: > > 77.208] (WW) NV: Ignoring unsupported device 0x10de13

GeForce GTX 750 Ti upgraded to unsupported

Greetings, Since I upgraded to 11/stable from 10/stable, it appears that my video card is no longer supported by either nvidia-driver or nvidia-driver-340: 77.208] (WW) NV: Ignoring unsupported device 0x10de1380 (GM107 [GeForce GTX 750 Ti]) at 01@00:00:0 The error message is identical for

Re: why kdbg hasn't been upgraded?

12/8/10 Chris Rees > > > >> Copying in maintainer. > >> On 10 Aug 2012 10:42, "HU Dong" wrote: > >> > >>> kdbg has been upgraded to 2.5.1 with qt4 library, while the port > >>> devel/kdbg is still 2.2.0 with qt3 library. I modi

Re: why kdbg hasn't been upgraded?

Reply from maintainer. On 10 Aug 2012 11:12, "Thomas Sander" wrote: > Hello, > > It has no reason why the version is so old. You can submit a PR. > > B.R. > Thomas > > 2012/8/10 Chris Rees > >> Copying in maintainer. >> On 10 Aug 2012 10:42, &

Re: why kdbg hasn't been upgraded?

Copying in maintainer. On 10 Aug 2012 10:42, "HU Dong" wrote: > kdbg has been upgraded to 2.5.1 with qt4 library, while the port > devel/kdbg is still 2.2.0 with qt3 library. I modified the port a > little and had it successfully built. Is there any reason that it > shou

why kdbg hasn't been upgraded?

kdbg has been upgraded to 2.5.1 with qt4 library, while the port devel/kdbg is still 2.2.0 with qt3 library. I modified the port a little and had it successfully built. Is there any reason that it should stay with the older version? If not, I'll submit a PR. B.R. HU

Re: x11/kde4-workspace: can not be build or upgraded in FreeBSD 10.0/amd64

On Thursday 26 January 2012 20:43:08 Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote: > Weird, these errors used to show up only with clang. I fixed them > upstream [1] some time ago, but 4.7.4 was released before that. You'll find the patch attached, put it in files/. > Are you using some special gcc flags to turn

Re: x11/kde4-workspace: can not be build or upgraded in FreeBSD 10.0/amd64

"O. Hartmann" writes: > I have trouble with one of our boxes running FBSD 10.0/amd64 while > updating ports with portmaster. The box in question refuses > compiling/upgrading x11/kde4-workspace. I tried compiling with both > legacy GCC and CLANG. > > What's going wrong and how can this repaired?

x11/kde4-workspace: can not be build or upgraded in FreeBSD 10.0/amd64

I have trouble with one of our boxes running FBSD 10.0/amd64 while updating ports with portmaster. The box in question refuses compiling/upgrading x11/kde4-workspace. I tried compiling with both legacy GCC and CLANG. What's going wrong and how can this repaired? Thanks in advance, Oliver [ 72%

Keyboard problem on upgraded to kde 4.3.5 with system crash - help

Thanks in advance for any help I reported problems following an upgrade ro 4.3.5 in a previous thread: kde4 Upgrade to 4.3.5 -problems The major problem was solved BUT I am now left without a working keyboard although the mouse works. After kde4 loaded with usual plasmas but no keyboard input w

Re: Upgraded Trac, but still getting errors...

t all. Next thing I did was Google the error message, but nothing really matched. After that I decided to rebuild trac and deps (portupgrade -rR), which didn't fix the problem. I then got frustrated and ran a portupgrade -fa, which again didn't fix the problem. I upgraded python fr

Upgraded Trac, but still getting errors...

which didn't fix the problem. I then got frustrated and ran a portupgrade -fa, which again didn't fix the problem. I upgraded python from python25 to python26, using the procedure outlined in /usr/ports/UPDATING which didn't fix the problem either. Through all this, I di

Re: php5 on a system upgraded from FBSD5.4R to FBSD6.3-p3

did you rebuild apache first after doing the upgrade? -- From: "FreeBSD Daemon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 6:13 AM To: ; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: php5 on a system upgraded from FBSD5.4R to FBSD

Re: php5 on a system upgraded from FBSD5.4R to FBSD6.3-p3

FreeBSD Daemon pisze: dear list, i just upgraded my system from 5.4R to 6.3-p3 when i now try to install php5 w/ apache integration (apache module) i get the following error when i try to start apache20: Cannot load /usr/local/libexec/apache2/libphp5.so into server: /usr/local/libexec/apache2

php5 on a system upgraded from FBSD5.4R to FBSD6.3-p3

dear list, i just upgraded my system from 5.4R to 6.3-p3 when i now try to install php5 w/ apache integration (apache module) i get the following error when i try to start apache20: Cannot load /usr/local/libexec/apache2/libphp5.so into server: /usr/local/libexec/apache2/libphp5.so: Undefined

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

Jeremy Messenger wrote: On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:22:56 -0500, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Miroslav Lachman wrote: And last question - /etc/portmaster.rc - is it realy right place according to man hier? I would expect it in /usr/local/etc/portmaster.rc. You're absolutely right. I

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:22:56 -0500, Doug Barton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Miroslav Lachman wrote: And last question - /etc/portmaster.rc - is it realy right place according to man hier? I would expect it in /usr/local/etc/portmaster.rc. You're absolutely right. I copied the code for thi

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

Miroslav Lachman wrote: I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined BEFOREBUILD / BEFOREDEINSTALL / AFTERINSTALL? Or is there any future plan to do so? It is annoying if I end up with some dead servic

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 04:27:21PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > Wesley Shields wrote: >> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 07:48:23AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: >>> I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is t

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

Wesley Shields wrote: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 07:48:23AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

Jeremy Chadwick wrote: On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined BEFOREBUILD / BEFOREDEINSTALL / AFTERINSTALL? Or is there any fut

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 07:48:23 -0700 Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > > I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any > > possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with > > defined

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 07:48:23AM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > > I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any > > possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined > > BEFOREBUILD /

Re: portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 02:52:35PM +0100, Miroslav Lachman wrote: > I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any > possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined > BEFOREBUILD / BEFOREDEINSTALL / AFTERINSTALL? Or is there any future plan > to do so?

portmaster and restarting of upgraded daemons

I am almost new to portmaster, so I got a question - is there any possibility to restart installed services as in portupgrade with defined BEFOREBUILD / BEFOREDEINSTALL / AFTERINSTALL? Or is there any future plan to do so? It is annoying if I end up with some dead services after upgrade just be

HEADS UP: editors/emacs upgraded to 22.1

Hello, editors/emacs port is upgraded to 22.1. Since this is a major upgrade, all installed elisp ports should be reinstalled. Please add EMACS_PORT_NAME=emacs22 to /etc/make.conf and upgrade Emacs and related ports with: # portupgrade -fr emacs If you want to keep using Emacs 21.3, please add

portupgrade upgraded to 2.3.1

Hi! At last I've upgraded portupgrade port to portupgrade-devel version (with a little fix). You can back now from portupgrade-devel to portupgrade with the command: portupgrade -o ports-mgmt/portupgrade portupgrade-devel -- Dixi. Sem. ___ fr

Re: i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

On Tue, 22 May 2007, Rob MacGregor wrote: KAYVEN RIESE unleashed the infinite monkeys on 21/05/2007 23:10 producing: so u get to be mean to me and here i sit with X connection to :0.0 broken something to do with fonts but now i can't even do startx Please don't top post. What's the output

Re: i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

On Tue, 22 May 2007, Rob MacGregor wrote: KAYVEN RIESE unleashed the infinite monkeys on 21/05/2007 23:10 producing: so u get to be mean to me and here i sit with X connection to :0.0 broken something to do with fonts but now i can't even do startx Please don't top post. What's the outpu

Re: i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

KAYVEN RIESE unleashed the infinite monkeys on 21/05/2007 23:10 producing: > so u get to be mean to me and here i sit with > > X connection to :0.0 broken > > something to do with fonts but now i can't even do startx Please don't top post. What's the output of: uname -a -- Rob | Oh my God! T

Re: i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

l clients so they may not even see your message if the original thread isn't something they would normally look at. Headers from your message "i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2": In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Headers from

Re: i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

ds referencing the message ID of the mail you replied to. Many FreeBSD developers and users use thread-enabled mail clients so they may not even see your message if the original thread isn't something they would normally look at. Headers from your message "i thought i upgraded

i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2

i thought i upgraded to freeBSD-STABLE 6.2 but i just tried to install this timeseal port and got this strange message that seems to contradict this: bsd@/root# cd /usr/ports/games/timeseal bsd@/root# make; make install clean On FreeBSD before 6.2 ports system unfortunately can not set default

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

>> binary named "gpg?" > > As an end user, I see this as a real issue. If I upgrade a port, > I expect the upgraded port to have a similar user interface. From > the comments in this thread, it seems that there are significant > changes between gnupg 1.x and gnupg 2.x.

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

er, I see this as a real issue. If I upgrade a port, > I expect the upgraded port to have a similar user interface. From > the comments in this thread, it seems that there are significant > changes between gnupg 1.x and gnupg 2.x. > >> to suggest to users that 2.x is the default,

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 02:08:06PM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Vasil Dimov wrote: [...] > > - NLS "Native Language Support" on \ > > [...] > > +OPTIONS= NLS "Include National Language Support" on \ > > > > I believe the N in NLS stands for Native. > > It's National. That's why you hav

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

Vasil Dimov wrote: > On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:44:00AM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote: >> At Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:28:21 -0800, >> Doug Barton wrote: > [...] >>> What might make sense is for the gnupg 2.x port to install a gpg >>> symlink to gpg2. I've done that on my own system for convenience sake. >>>

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Dec 11, 2006, at 7:09 PM, Jun Kuriyama wrote: Anyway, this way maybe old-porters thinking. I liked to use "/" directory name (without version number). Using version number in ports directory is very exceptional event for keeping old ports (like "emacs", "emacs19", "emacs20"). I thought thi

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 10:44:00AM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote: > At Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:28:21 -0800, > Doug Barton wrote: [...] > > What might make sense is for the gnupg 2.x port to install a gpg > > symlink to gpg2. I've done that on my own system for convenience sake. > > That will get hairy if t

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

At Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:28:21 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > >> I have no clue about last problem for now (only pkg-message or > >> UPDATING). This maybe critical for casual portupgrade users. > > > > Err... I wonder... How about repo-copying (or rather, repo-moving) > > the current security/gnupg t

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

Peter Pentchev wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 05:46:50PM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote: >> At Mon, 11 Dec 2006 23:43:48 -0800, >> Doug Barton wrote: >>> If this is your plan, it leads me to the next question, which is how >>> are you going to handle the fact that GnuPG 2.x does not install a >>> bina

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 05:46:50PM +0900, Jun Kuriyama wrote: > At Mon, 11 Dec 2006 23:43:48 -0800, > Doug Barton wrote: > > If this is your plan, it leads me to the next question, which is how > > are you going to handle the fact that GnuPG 2.x does not install a > > binary named "gpg?" Will you i

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

port, I expect the upgraded port to have a similar user interface. From the comments in this thread, it seems that there are significant changes between gnupg 1.x and gnupg 2.x. >to suggest to users that 2.x is the default, I think we need to >provide support for those legacy(?) apps that t

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

At Mon, 11 Dec 2006 23:43:48 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > If this is your plan, it leads me to the next question, which is how > are you going to handle the fact that GnuPG 2.x does not install a > binary named "gpg?" Will you install a symlink if gnupg1 is not > installed? And if so, will it CONFLI

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

Jun Kuriyama wrote: > At first, thank you for your helping to upgrade our gnupg world to > 2.0.x. And sorry I cannot explain as you can feel reasonable. I just want to make sure that the relevant issues are well thought out, which it sounds like you have done. > I just think "security/gnupg" sh

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On 12/12/06, Jun Kuriyama <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just think "security/gnupg" should be used as "what you should choose" for "GnuPG". If new ports user wants to install GnuPG, I hope there is "security/gnupg" as recommended stable version. An unversioned directory is the maintainer-design

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

At Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:15:59 -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > Thanks for letting us know what you're plans are. I think you know > what I'm going to say next. ;) As I suggested when I wrote to you in > private e-mail some time ago, I think it would be more in line with > the plans that the developers ha

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 10:15:59AM -0800, Doug Barton wrote: > > Jun Kuriyama wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm planning to upgrade security/gnupg to 2.0.1. This upgrade > > includes portrevision bumps to indicate dependency changes. > > > > I'm testing conditional plist, upgrading procedure by portup

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

On Mon, Dec 11, 2006 at 07:42:00PM +, Shaun Amott wrote: > > In addition: I would guess that mail/imp, and maybe others, expect > bin/gpg to be present. If this is indeed the case, it would need > additional patching. > Sorry - ignore that last bit. I wasn't thinking. :-) -- Shaun Amott //

Re: HEADS UP : security/gnupg will be upgraded to 2.0.1

Jun Kuriyama wrote: > Hi, > > I'm planning to upgrade security/gnupg to 2.0.1. This upgrade > includes portrevision bumps to indicate dependency changes. > > I'm testing conditional plist, upgrading procedure by portupgrade. > But I think it's almost ready to commit. > > If you have further sug

Flagstar-Bank Online Website Has Been Upgraded

Flagstar Bank Online website has been upgraded. You will need to re-enroll your Flagstar Bank online profile to gain access to these changes. Simply enter your login information and follow the prompts. To re-enroll for Flagstar Bank Online [1]click here