> You're correct in that better awareness is almost definitely the key.
> Would you consider posting the -stable and -current port build results
You can find the realtime results from http://bento.freebsd.org/
--
-- David([EMAIL PROTECTED] -or- [EMAIL PROTECTED])
To Unsubscribe: send ma
Satoshi.
On Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 12:31:52AM -0700, Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami wrote:
> * From: Nik Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> I really wish you would stop spreading FUD. Don't open your mouth if
> you don't know what you are talking about.
I do know what I'm talking about -- specific
* From: Nik Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I really wish you would stop spreading FUD. Don't open your mouth if
you don't know what you are talking about.
* I was under the impression that if you were CVSup'ing the ports tree then
* any changes to the ports subsystem (for example, new command l
On 12-Jul-99 Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
>> > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
>> > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>> >
>> > Why not?
>>
>> A. Likely because someone running onl
On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
>
> > > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> > > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
> > >
> > > Why not?
> >
> > A. Likely because someo
On Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 12:46:12AM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
> I was under the impression that if you were CVSup'ing the ports tree then
> any changes to the ports subsystem (for example, new command line
> parameters to fetch(1)) would be utilised by the ports system *before*
> they had been
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> > Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> > ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
> >
> > Why not?
>
> A. Likely because someone running only on a -current box last committed
>a cha
On Mon, Jul 12, 1999 at 03:54:40PM -0700, Chris Piazza wrote:
> Um..er... I hope you were really just being sarcastic. All ports
> should work on -stable as well as -current. In fact, more build
> on -stable than -current according to http://bento.freebsd.org/.
> If any ports work on one but not
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system. Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports system only targets -current, trying to get it to
> work with -stable is too much work. If you want to be sure of
On Sun, 11 Jul 1999, Nik Clayton wrote:
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports system only targets -current, trying to get
> it to work with -sta
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
A. Likely because someone running only on a -current box last committed
a change to the port which broke it with 3.x. Please submit a bug
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999 at 10:00:50PM +0100, Nik Clayton wrote:
>
hmm...
> >
> > Any other question?
>
> Q: I want to use this cool piece of software that's in the FreeBSD
> ports system. But I can't build it on my 3.x-stable system.
>
> Why not?
>
> A: Ah, sorry. The ports syst
On Sun, Jul 11, 1999 at 08:13:37PM +0900, Daniel C. Sobral wrote:
[snip]
> "Q: Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current? That's got
> all the latest stuff, right?
[snip]
> If you can live with that, and think you have any compelling reason
> to run -current, read the handbook for fur
Nicolas Blais wrote:
>
> Hi. I've finally installed FreeBSD 4.0 and to tell you the truth, I'm
> not
> very impressed. I was expecting some bugs but not like that...
Well, maybe this FAQ entry candidate will help clarify things for
you:
"Q: Why shouldn't I just go ahead and run -current? Tha
On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> I'm also sure this response will probably scare a few people off and
> garner stern rebukes from the newbie hand-holding folks,
As one of the "newbie hand-holding folks" I would say that the
kindest thing you can do for a new user who's wand
Hi,
On Mon, Jul 05, 1999 at 04:04:46PM -0400, Nicolas Blais wrote:
> Hi. I've finally installed FreeBSD 4.0 and to tell you the truth, I'm
> not very impressed. I was expecting some bugs but not like that...
Not the best way to start a message if you want to get responses. Also,
the wrapping
> Also, before I removed 3.2 from my system, I made a little cpp hello
> world program and with GCC the binary was 8k. That same program was
> 40k with EGCS. Anyone know why?
Look at the ``ldd'' output. libstdc++ is statically linked if you used
the egcs port (which if you did this on 3.2 you
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sheldon Hearn writes:
: Haha! The secret to surviving CURRENT without big cojones is to watch
: cvs commit mail very closely.
When one has big cojones, they are a bigger target so it winds up not
helping much :-)
Warner
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECT
On Mon, 05 Jul 1999 13:42:39 MST, "Jordan K. Hubbard" wrote:
> I also make this point now and with such force because various signs
> and portents indicate that -current is about to become a dangerous
> place again for awhile, and a lot of people who really don't have the
> cojones to run -curr
On Mon, 5 Jul 1999, Nicolas Blais wrote:
[snip]
> Also, before I removed 3.2 from my system, I made a little cpp hello
> world
> program and with GCC the binary was 8k. That same program was 40k with
> EGCS. Anyone know why?
this is probably caused by the exception handling that is included w
> Hi. I've finally installed FreeBSD 4.0 and to tell you the truth, I'm
> not very impressed. I was expecting some bugs but not like that...
I don't see a problem with FreeBSD 4.0 so much as a problem with
someone jumping beyond their abilities. :)
Please, go back to 3.2-STABLE. 4.0-CURRENT i
21 matches
Mail list logo
