Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:53:39 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> To: Clint Olsen <clint@0lsen.net> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Portversion claims a newer port is available but it ain't so Message-ID: <20050116155339.7a9c29c0@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <20050116074724.GA72796@0lsen.net> References: <20050116013239.GA84616@0lsen.net> <20050116041659.GA62683@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050116074724.GA72796@0lsen.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 23:47:24 -0800 Clint Olsen <clint@0lsen.net> wrote: > On Jan 15, Kris Kennaway wrote: > > But the ports tree *does* have 1.1.0_4. You probably did 'make > > fetchindex', which works against the latest ports tree. cvsup and you'll > > get the update. > > Actually, I didn't do a make fetchindex, but it seems as if portversion > does this at times. At any rate, you were right. Running cvsup pulls down > the latest port. It does if you dont have the index file (e.g. it was deleted by cvsup). I find useful to use sysutils/p5-FreeBSD-Portindex after cvsuping to have my index up-to-date and sync with local installed ports -- IOnut Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050116155339.7a9c29c0>