Date: Sat, 1 Jun 1996 13:07:23 +0300 (EET DST) From: Narvi <narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee> To: Satoshi Asami <asami@cs.berkeley.edu> Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, jkh@time.cdrom.com, ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Request for feedback: REQUIRES_OS_VERSION feature. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960601130417.12757A-100000@haldjas.folklore.ee> In-Reply-To: <199606010632.XAA12050@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 May 1996, Satoshi Asami wrote: > * Time for the -stable branch of ports and packages? So it would no more be > * a requirement to make a link from so.2.2 to so.3.0... on stable to run > * new ports. (Yes, I do understand the negative side of the thing). > > Do you? > > Anyway, there will be a package-stable tree as soon as Jordan coughs > up his 2.1-*-snap and reinstalls thud (our build machine) with it. > > The libc version number has nothing to do with people who compile > things from the ports tree. It just influencies those who have bandwidt bad enough to want to grab the packages instead of ports, plus I've seen packages (arena, for example) not to compile on stable.... Yes, it might have been that something was missing or just happened - I jsut found it easier to grab the packeage and make the link. > > Satoshi > Sander
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960601130417.12757A-100000>