Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 12:01:14 -0600 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: /usr/portsnap vs. /var/db/portsnap Message-ID: <42F64C6A.5010407@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <42F64990.4090005@freebsd.org> References: <42F47C0D.2020704@freebsd.org> <20050806092232.GA850@zaphod.nitro.dk> <42F489DC.1080400@freebsd.org> <20050807115927.GA851@zaphod.nitro.dk> <20050807173003.GA7290@soaustin.net> <42F646B9.7020703@samsco.org> <42F64990.4090005@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Colin Percival wrote: > Scott Long wrote: > >>I think that portsnap is a very good feature and I'm ready to tout it >>for the 6.0 release. The technical problems, such as they are, are >>pretty insignificant and are just about solved. > > > Umm... *shuffles feet*... I wasn't planning on having portsnap in the > base system for FreeBSD 6.0. I'd rather give it a couple of months to > settle in and MFC it before FreeBSD 5.5 and FreeBSD 6.1. People can > always install it from the ports tree until then. > > Unless you really want an insta-MFC in the middle of a release freeze, > of course... > > Colin Percival Ah, sorry, I'm just too eager I guess =-) Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?42F64C6A.5010407>