Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 05:26:44 -0400 From: Duane Whitty <duane@greenmeadow.ca> To: Eric Kjeldergaard <kjelderg@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, RW <list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Subject: Re: Standard way of updating 6.x ? Message-ID: <43E07ED4.508@greenmeadow.ca> In-Reply-To: <200602011133.53031.kjelderg@gmail.com> References: <bdf25fde0601310831qfda3239j8da895b74868e12@mail.gmail.com> <93676E29-4F0E-40DC-904C-225A859D0B78@u.washington.edu> <200602010156.57750.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> <200602011133.53031.kjelderg@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eric Kjeldergaard wrote: > Wednesday 01 February 2006 10:56、RW さんは書きました: > >>On Tuesday 31 January 2006 17:45, Garrett Cooper wrote: >> >>>On Jan 31, 2006, at 8:31 AM, Xn Nooby wrote: >>> >>>portupgrade: Use for updating your actual ports programs. >>> >>> There may be a more elegant solution though and I would be more than >>>happy to hear it too :). >>>-Garrett >> >>I find that portmanager generally does a better job at keeping ports up to >>date without manual intervention. A notable example being its ability to >>upgrade Gnome without the help of a script. > > > I also found portupgrade both more capable in many cases and more easy-to-use > (just portmanager -u to do what one "usually" wants to do). Too bad it was > pulled from ports. > Hi everyone, I just checked the change log for portmanager. It appears the author has re-given permission to redistribute it. --Duane Whitty
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43E07ED4.508>