Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:41:49 -0500 From: "Scott T. Hildreth" <shildreth@allantgroup.com> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=E1bor_K=F6vesd=E1n?= <gabor@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD Emulation <emulation@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: I am trying to compile under linux compat Message-ID: <1156974109.54794.106.camel@scotth.emsphone.com> In-Reply-To: <44F6055D.6080409@FreeBSD.org> References: <1156957083.54794.75.camel@scotth.emsphone.com> <68109618@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <1156967569.54794.92.camel@scotth.emsphone.com> <91304074@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <1156973617.54794.100.camel@scotth.emsphone.com> <44F6055D.6080409@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Just curious, if linux_base-fc4 is going to be the default, why not
> > make a linux-devtools port that coincides with the linux_base port?
So currently there aren't plans for a updated linux-devtool port?
> >
> >
> >
> I'd suggest stage3 instead of stage1 since it is the most complete
> version. WITH_LINUXBASE is okay, if you don't want to chroot, but that
> is discouraged, since _none_ of the related ports are guaranteed to work
> properly with that. Only the default linux_base port is supported
> officially by our ports collection, which is already linux_base-fc4 at
> the moment, that's why I did not mention this way in my previous answer.
>
--
Scott T. Hildreth <shildreth@allantgroup.com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1156974109.54794.106.camel>