From owner-freebsd-ports Wed Oct 7 15:42:37 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id PAA11888 for freebsd-ports-outgoing; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:42:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from spawn.nectar.com (spawn.nectar.com [204.27.67.86]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAA11882; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 15:42:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@spawn.nectar.com) Received: from localhost.nectar.com ([127.0.0.1] helo=spawn.nectar.com) by spawn.nectar.com with esmtp (Exim 1.92 #1) id 0zR2HD-0000Gl-00; Wed, 7 Oct 1998 17:41:47 -0500 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 X-PGP-RSAfprint: 00 F9 E6 A2 C5 4D 0A 76 26 8B 8B 57 73 D0 DE EE X-PGP-RSAkey: http://www.nectar.com/nectar-pgp262.txt From: Jacques Vidrine In-reply-to: <199810072230.PAA11377@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> References: <199810072230.PAA11377@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> Subject: Re: What's the right way to handle old bsd.port.mk? To: asami@FreeBSD.ORG (Satoshi Asami) cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 17:41:47 -0500 Message-Id: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- OK, one more thing. As far as I know, updating bsd.port.mk will require end users to do one of the following: * cvsup and install bsd.port.mk from src/share/mk * use cvsweb.cgi to download the correct revision of bsd.port.mk * grab either ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-stable/src/share/mk/bsd.port.mk OR ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-current/src/share/mk/bsd.port.mk depending Seems like the latter is probably easiest for most users. Can you think of any snafus or better alternatives before I write something up saying ``do this to stay in sync with the ports collection''? Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org On 7 October 1998 at 15:30, asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi Asami) wrote: > * Point me to the documentation in question and I'd be glad to > * add a paragraph or two about keeping up with ports if it appears > * to be needed. > > www.freebsd.org/ports > www.freebsd.org/handbook/ports.html > > come to mind. > > * Hmm, now I get why NetBSD has their makefiles as part of the > * collection rather than part of the base system. > > That has its problems too.... > > Satoshi > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNhvuKzeRhT8JRySpAQG+5gP+Np/04I5YpDKpk/hBQvfvzq2V4hccmkwy 4qih/tI71GlLt+7OD4kBF0pAJtlDO7n54Q3TqIHyC7WD7+16ao4pz/GIm16yc3zm sjxZQjvmY0W90iLeIsCPYfJHZ9gIiMjaxjezhNYcm+7NqYoBDqWhNJpCUokhRMTp 0o/jF5PfqBY= =Futr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message