Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 14:41:39 -0400 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Marko Kuntic <mkuntic@mioc.hr>, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: linux_base-debian - going to 3.1? Message-ID: <20060408184139.GA36382@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20060408180720.GA35691@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20060408122030.Y82617@zagreb.mioc.hr> <20060408182538.41c59637@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <20060408180720.GA35691@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 02:07:20PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:25:38PM +0200, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > Am Sat, 8 Apr 2006 12:22:11 +0200 (CEST) > > schrieb Marko Kuntic <mkuntic@mioc.hr>: > >=20 > > > Hello, > > >=20 > > > Are there any plans for upgrading the FreeBSD port of Debian Linux up= to its=20 > > > stable release (3.1) in the near future (like in time for the release= of=20 > > > FreeBSD 6.1)? > >=20 > > Very unlikely. The default linux_base is linux_base-8. Everything is > > supposed to work with the default one. If it's doesn't break with > > another linux base port, then you are free to feel lucky (there are > > known bugs in non-default linux ports, the old maintainer wasn't > > willing to fix them and insisted that the default linux base port is > > changed to fit his style, ATM those non-default linux base ports are > > unmaintained). > >=20 > > Some people are working on updating the default linux base to fc3. But > > this will not happen before the release. We're holding back some > > commits until the release is out of the door, since those commits would > > change too much before the release. > >=20 > > Feel free to submit an update for the debian based linux base port, but > > even if you do it *now* it will most likely not be available in the > > release. >=20 > Definitely not; the package builds were complete and "carved in stone" > some weeks ago. >=20 > What you say is correct though; the port is unlikely to be updated > (and in fact is going to be scheduled for removal since it doesn't > build properly) unless an interested user such as yourself takes it in > hand. By "yourself" I meant Marko. Kris --a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFEOAPiWry0BWjoQKURAhZ/AJ4nGEpDHMCtGMhv/xAL74bjcSJsAgCgg8FF 1vgDEW7j/XJUyKvzhDqGMf4= =HWff -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --a8Wt8u1KmwUX3Y2C--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060408184139.GA36382>