On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:26:40PM -0500, cothrige wrote:
> On 9/7/07, Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I
> > > had an option during install to add.
On 9/7/07, Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote:
>
> > Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I
> > had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and
> > so had that which was on the 6.
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 12:16:32 -0400
Jerry McAllister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In general, the OS versions are managed so that anything that will
> run in one version of a main branch will run in another. eg, if
> it will run in 6.1, it should run in 6.2 and 6.3. But it may well
> not work in
That is the correct but I prefer to use portsnap for ports and keep
cvsup just for core OS!
Robert Huff wrote:
Lars Eighner writes:
> assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate
> supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding
> this corre
On 9/7/07, Lars Eighner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, cothrige wrote:
>
> > assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate
> > supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding
> > this correctly?
>
> No. It is not "must." You "can" upd
cothrige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I
> had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and
> so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other
> responses, it is looking like perhaps that is n
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote:
> On 9/7/07, Erich Dollansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Howdy, and thanks for the help.
>
> [snip]
> >
> > > I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the
> >
> > Just stick with 6.2 for the moment.
>
Hi,
I can't answer all your questions, but will take a shot at a couple.
You should check out the handbook at:
http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports.html
and
http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/
For more complete information.
On Fri, Se
On 9/7/07, Erich Dollansky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
Howdy, and thanks for the help.
[snip]
>
> > I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the
>
> Just stick with 6.2 for the moment.
I had thought this might be the best method, and so figured I would
for some time
Lars Eighner writes:
> > assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate
> > supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding
> > this correctly?
[deletia]
> Many people do it it two operations because they really are two
> different thing
Predrag Punosevac wrote:
I am not sure. I know that portsnap is the part of base package.
dgmm wrote:
On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote:
2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install
any other
ports.
Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalen
I am not sure. I know that portsnap is the part of base package.
dgmm wrote:
On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote:
2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other
ports.
Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalent to cvsup part of the bas
On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote:
> 2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other
> ports.
Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalent to cvsup part of the base
system now?
--
Dave
___
freebsd-quest
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, cothrige wrote:
assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate
supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding
this correctly?
No. It is not "must." You "can" update your source and your ports tree
with one supfile. You can add
Hi,
let me give some very basic answers.
cothrige wrote:
ports system is completely separate from the OS itself, and that these
Applications have nothing to do with the operating system. In theory at
least.
Practically it is more limited.
can be upgraded or updated separately. From what
I know this is going to be a very dumb question, but I just can't seem
to get my mind around exactly what is involved and what I should do
regarding this issue. I understand from reading the handbook that the
ports system is completely separate from the OS itself, and that these
can be upgraded or
On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 11:52, rotten rottie wrote:
> I know this is probably a touchy subject but..
>
> "... the ports tree isn't versioned, it's the equivalent of current"
>
> Wouldnt it be logical to have current/stable versions of the ports tree ?
> Then when you install a base system from
t;
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Questions about updating...
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 03:48:05 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.102]) by
mc10-f7.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 3 Dec 2003
21:52:22 -0800
Received: from mindcor
Subject: Re: Questions about updating...
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 03:48:05 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: from ms-smtp-03-eri0.southeast.rr.com ([24.25.9.102]) by
mc10-f7.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 3 Dec 2003
21:52:22 -0800
Received: from mindcore.net (rd
rotten rottie wrote:
I am a linux user that wants to switch to freebsd... I am a bit confused
about applying updates etc..
I installed a box for trial it was 5.1, I wanted to see if I could use
ports
to update openssh for a test examp. After the port installed I noticed
that
another version of o
> From: rotten rottie
> I installed a box for trial it was 5.1, I wanted to see if I could use
> ports
> to update openssh for a test examp. After the port installed I noticed
> that
> another version of openssh was installed on the system. I
Bad test example. As with named, sendmail and a few ot
On Wednesday 03 December 2003 17:39,
"rotten rottie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent a missive stating:
> 1) if there are two trees(lack of better words) why would ssh exist in
> both
> the system tree and the ports tree ? Wouldnt it be better to have it in
> the
> ports tree ?
Ports are not installed b
rotten rottie wrote:
I am a linux user that wants to switch to freebsd... I am a bit confused
about applying updates etc..
I installed a box for trial it was 5.1, I wanted to see if I could use
ports to update openssh for a test examp. After the port installed I
noticed
that another version of
I am a linux user that wants to switch to freebsd... I am a bit confused
about applying updates etc..
I installed a box for trial it was 5.1, I wanted to see if I could use
ports
to update openssh for a test examp. After the port installed I noticed
that
another version of openssh was installed o
24 matches
Mail list logo
