--- On Tue, 12/20/11, Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> wrote: > From: Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org> > Subject: Re: Proper way to update system + ports? > To: misc@openbsd.org > Date: Tuesday, December 20, 2011, 10:25 AM > On 2011-12-19, James Hozier <guitars...@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > I ran into an error trying to install Firefox (I think > the latest > > version in Ports is 8.0.1) so I thought I might be > updating > > incorrectly. > > > >===> Checking files for firefox-5.0p3 > >>> Fetch > >>> http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/5.0/source/firefox-5.0.source.tar.bz2 > > ftp: Error retrieving file: 404 Not Found > > Mozilla don't keep many old releases on the http > distribution > sites. You can fetch this from > > ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/5.0/source/firefox-5.0.source.tar.bz2 > > I'll add this to ports/www/mozilla/mozilla.port.mk in > -stable > in a bit. > > I'd really suggest running -current if you want to keep up > to > date with things like browsers. Then you can just use > packages > rather than spend hours building (also note that only fixes > for > the worst bugs will get into -stable; and even then only > if > they won't cause problems for other ports needing a whole > chain > of updates). > > Just because -stable is named -stable doesn't imply that > -current > is likely to break often. > >
I guess it is sort of ironic that trying to build Firefox from -stable was broken, but in -current it worked fine. As far as keeping up with -current goes, would it be bad netiquette to update my system every 12 hours just to keep up with the changes? Or is that being a resource hog?
