Date: Sun, 10 Oct 1999 17:37:03 +0200 From: Neil Blakey-Milner <nbm@mithrandr.moria.org> To: Mike Meyer <mwm@phone.net> Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: install newer version over old one... Message-ID: <19991010173703.A74118@rucus.ru.ac.za> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910091254450.357-100000@guru.phone.net> References: <19991009101642.A80651@rucus.ru.ac.za> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910091254450.357-100000@guru.phone.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat 1999-10-09 (13:07), Mike Meyer wrote: > :->You can't expect to have a vim-4.3.2 package and a vim5-5.0.1 > :->package. > > Question - can we expect that everyone will *eventually* move to vim > 5? Or, for my favorite example, the gtk1# ports - don't we expect that > eventually the earlier versions will vanish as other ports move to the > new ones? This has nothing to do with whether or not people _will_ upgrade, but rather about what the upgrade path _is_. If a person used vim4, there is no reason that person won't use vim5 eventually. > :->What we really need is a mechanism to show the scope of upgrades > :->- whether ssh-2.0.0 _really_ upgrades ssh-1.2.27. > > Unless "really" means "we can expect all users to move to some point > in the future", this isn't right. From what I can tell, ssh2 upgrades > ssh1 in every technical sense. They are not compatible. ssh2 needs ssh1 to be around to access sshd1. ssh1 can't talk to sshd2. Neil -- Neil Blakey-Milner nbm@rucus.ru.ac.za To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991010173703.A74118>