Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:27:27 -0500 From: Will Andrews <will@csociety.org> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Vladimir Savichev <vlad@ariel.phys.wesleyan.edu>, Will Andrews <will@csociety.org>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: XFree86-4.2.0 install issues Message-ID: <20020318222727.GW53073@squall.waterspout.com> In-Reply-To: <p05101503b8bc10a3c0e0@[128.113.24.47]> References: <20020318172158.GA22743@ariel.phys.wesleyan.edu> <20020318184700.GN53073@squall.waterspout.com> <20020318200748.GA39841@ariel.phys.wesleyan.edu> <p05101503b8bc10a3c0e0@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:25:02PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > At 3:07 PM -0500 3/18/02, Vladimir Savichev wrote: > >thanks for reply, actually I managed to install XF-4.2.0 > >from the ports back in January and did > >portupgrade -rv XFree86 > >so I ended up having my XFree86-4 megaport deleted without > >having a new one, don't ask me why portupgrade did it to > >me. > > The big complication here is that some of us did install > the earlier megaport, and this new meta-port does not work > well in that case. There is probably some validity to the > argument that we are "on our own" if we installed that > earlier megaport, particularly those who tracked it down > and installed it *after* the very short period of time that > it was actually in the ports tree. No, that's not supposed to make any difference. However, to prove this to myself, I've found a machine with an older version of the megaport installed and have started a "portupgrade -R XFree86" on it. I'll report some more on this when I get there. -- wca 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?20020318222727.GW53073>