Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 9 Apr 2005 14:43:20 -0700
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        sergei@gnezdov.net
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Installing portupgrade without X.org
Message-ID:  <20050409214320.GA81681@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <slrnd5gf82.1nb0.use-reply-to@gnezdov.net>
References:  <8953a1db05040904263a1e2a79@mail.gmail.com> <20050409165612.GA91236@noisy.compsoc.man.ac.uk> <slrnd5gf82.1nb0.use-reply-to@gnezdov.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 01:37:22PM -0700, Sergei Gnezdov wrote:
> On 2005-04-09, Lewis Thompson <lewiz@compsoc.man.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 12:26:48PM +0100, Paul Waring wrote:
> >> I'm currently trying to get portupgrade onto my new FreeBSD system by
> >> running make install clean from /usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade (after
> >> doing a recent cvsup). Everything seems to go along fine, it starts
> >> fetching all the packages it requires and then suddenly I see a
> >> download for X.org.
> >
> > It is not portupgrade that needs X but a dependent port.  Which specific
> > port?  In general just with WITHOUT_X11=3D1 to /etc/make.conf.
>=20
> I think it is
>=20
> WITHOUT_X11=3D"YES"
>=20
> Does it make any difference?

No, the value for such variables is unimportant (WITHOUT_X11=3D"NO"
works just as well)

Kris

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFCWEx4Wry0BWjoQKURAmxwAKDMujn6H/rDmiZYt2hfFZ/hABlLEACgi2L3
OelXFNq6r/BO60eo6WgZoQw=
=a29Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--bg08WKrSYDhXBjb5--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050409214320.GA81681>