Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 23:15:28 +0100 From: Torfinn Ingolfsen <tingox@gmail.com> To: FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Forcing upgrade to latest AVAILABLE version of open office? Message-ID: <AANLkTimRAomCAL%2B-g9LcpxJ=ko861iTAJ1sqLF5OOYBU@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <688115.13230.qm@web110316.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <AANLkTimvqD5CQ3oqnBBAfzrt4KvHv-W2cthCCHLX90kN@mail.gmail.com> <688115.13230.qm@web110316.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 4:35 PM, Mark Terribile <materribile@yahoo.com>wrote: > > > > Here's what I need: a working, installable version of openoffice.org . > > > The ports system on my FreeBSD 7.1 (which I need to keep stable for a > few > > > months) has only been willing to download a version that has security > > > problems and will not build. The makefile version is 1.324 for > > > openoffice.org-3 and 1.320 for openoffice.org-2 . > > > > > > I have issued a number of portupgrade commands, but portupgrade doesn't > > > even seem to know of the existance of anything later, ... > > > > 1. Update your ports tree. > > 2. run portupgrade / portmaster to upgrade the ports in > > question. > > > > ... In section 4.5.1 two methods for getting ports are > > described: csup and portsnap. > > Yes, that is exactly what I need. I'll try it later when I have the > chance, after I back up the whole ports area. > > And while the information is there, I find the documentation on freeBSD, > and all recent open-source systems, to be disappointing. Maybe I can't > Well, it is user written, and it is only as good as what we (the users and developers) have managed to put into it. That being said, I find that FreeBSD documentation is among the better for the open source projects that I am familiar with. There is a chapter in the FAQ about available documentation: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/support.html perhaps that will help you find what you need. > get it into my head; maybe I can't get my head into it. But I feel that > there is something missing. It's not something that I could provide > simply by starting to write or rewrite the documentation; it's a shared > understanding of what is needed: of the SEE ALSO that you need in man > pages, of the need for "architectonic" summaries of things like the ports > architecture, of the balance between structure and detail. > Well, people are different from each other, in the way they think about what's "logical", "easy" and so on (IMHO). Therefore, it isn't easy to say what's missing or what could be improved, unless you are able to put it into words. For myself, when I started with FreeBSD many years ago (FreeBSD 3.x), I had work experience from some SysV based unix systems. I had tried Linux, but it felt strange and different. When I tried FreeBSD, I was at home again immediately; all the commands were in their usual place, most of the config files were located where I expected them. And almost all commands had a man page. And the Project had a Handbook, both online and locally installed! Oh, those where the days... Well, enough of that. > If there's a place for me to contribute to -that- pool of skill, please > let me know. > Well, if you have specific suggestions in mind, the documentation Project would be the place: http://www.freebsd.org/docproj/ Other intereting ports-related this (just in case you aren't aware of them): FreshPorts: http://www.freshports.org/ the port named portdowngrade HTH -- Regards, Torfinn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTimRAomCAL%2B-g9LcpxJ=ko861iTAJ1sqLF5OOYBU>