Garrett Cooper writes:
>>
>> So if I change /usr/src/sys/conf/newvers.sh to something like vers 9.9 I'm
>> not
>> going to shoot myself in the foot if I try and update? I would really like to
>> avoid downgrading this box.I've altready been bitten once today and had to
>> build packages on my ti
"Hartmann, O." writes:
> On 09/28/11 09:26, Hartmann, O. wrote:
>
>> On 09/28/11 15:47, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
>>> Eitan Adler wrote:
>>>
2011/9/27 O. Hartmann :
> Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin
> 10 'X' for their tenth version of their operating s
Michael Butler writes:
> On 09/27/11 02:37, Daniel O'Connor wrote:
>
>>
>> On 27/09/2011, at 13:33, Ade Lovett wrote:
>>> That is to say, until 9.0-R happens, and for some considerable period
>>> afterwards, ya'll can pretty much expect ports/ to be non-functional on
>>> HEAD. PRs mentioning thi
Eduardo Morras writes:
> At 11:18 27/09/2011, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
>
>> > Now I understand why some OS vendors have choosen the latin 10 'X' for
>> > their tenth version of their operating system ...
>>
>>At least there will be a long rest after
>>the move to 10 is complete.. until FreeBSD 1
Holger Kipp writes:
> Am 27.09.2011 um 10:48 schrieb Thomas Mueller:
>
>>> From Brett Glass :
>>
>>> Unfortunately, due to past history, /usr is mixed-use. It normally
>>> contains both configuration information -- e.g. /usr/local/etc --
>>> and more volatile data such as users' home directories.
Kevin Oberman writes:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Ade Lovett wrote:
>
>> With the advent of the conversion of HEAD to 10.0-CURRENT and, as to be
>> expected, ports/ is going to be essentially unusable for a while.
>>
>> The issue stems from configure scripts (to choose something completel
