Date: Sat, 08 May 1999 20:51:44 -0600 From: Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net> To: Steve Price <sprice@hiwaay.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: New Toolkit: which packages are 3.1? Message-ID: <3734F840.6624850B@thuntek.net> References: <Pine.OSF.4.10.9905081343200.13997-100000@fly.HiWAAY.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Steve Price wrote: > > On Sat, 8 May 1999, Donald Wilde wrote: > > # The README on Disk1 claims there are NO packages on Disk1, Disk3 and > # Disk4 have the same README. If Disk1 has the 3.1 Packages, then its > # README is flawed. > > The packages on disc1 are the "must have, can't wait til after > the first reboot" ELF packages for the 3.x and 4.x i386 snapshots. > They were stuck on there towards the end of the cycle, because > we had a few spare bits left and my impromptu poll on the ports > mailing list showed that these were among the ones that people > said they couldn't live without. I see that it says there are no Yes, I see it's a really minimal set. Not even EMACS, you grizzled old UNIXheads!!! <sorry, couldn't resist...> > packages, and all I can think of was that we missed making the > correction. Though it might have been left that way, to keep > people from trying to install ELF packages while using the 2.2.8 > snapshot that's there. Should we amend the README or post an > ERRATA on the website somewhere? I went to the website, and saw nothing anywhere. I would suggest that -- in fine old UNIX tradition -- we make the ERRATA listings a little more prominent in either the docs or support (or both) sections for each of the disk sets. > > Unless the READMEs have changed from the ones up on bento then the > first part of disc3's says: > > "This CDROM contains the latest distfiles (for /usr/ports) for > the 2.2-STABLE branch and up as well as packages for the 2.2 > branch which were produced after 2.2.8 was released. The > packages may also be used in later (3.x and 4.x) releases with > the compat22 distribution loaded." It appears that we will be stuck with loading a.out compatibility for some time. I don't mind using ports rather than packages, but then I'm not running into disk space limits. I've also run into some binary software (e.g. Blender) which I had to use their static-linked a.out version. > > Discs [345] are exclusively for 2.2-STABLE, though some of the same > distfiles are required for 3.x and 4.x, and as it says you can use > a.out packages on the later releases if you have the a.out libraries > (compat22) installed. > Gee, Brett Glass should be thrilled. All the latest 2.2 upgrades in one place... > The only 3.1 bits on the Toolkit CDs besides the snapshots and a > few packages on disc1 are the contents of disc6, which represent > all of the distfiles that couldn't fit on the 3.1-RELEASE CDs. > Thanks for taking the time to check, Steve. Other than the one omission, the disks and the READMEs do say this, albeit in very terse fashion. To be honest with you, I think the Toolkit set is somewhat limited in utility for someone here in the US who has a measure of speed in his Internet connection. If I were in Ukraine or Zimbabwe or someplace like that, I'd be thrilled to have it, but it doesn't make sense for me to use it as a system install set if I have to refer back to the old 3.1-R set for packages I want. Unless I misunderstand, and the 3.1-R packages are a mixture? I know I've had at least one a.out/ELF compatibility problem, but it was a port. (socket++) -- Don Wilde "Bringing the Internet to everyone!" Wilde Media 1380 Rio Rancho Blvd. SE #117 voice: 505-771-0709 Rio Rancho, New Mexico 87124 e-mail: dwilde1@thuntek.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3734F840.6624850B>