Re: A simple question about patches for FreeBSD from http://security.freebsd.org/patches

[Rakhesh Sasidharan]

Is that mean if I use 5.5-release, I should apply all the patches above and

if I use 6.2-release I need only apply the
FreeBSD-SA-07:05.libarchive.asc
to
FreeBSD-SA-07:02.bind.asc
?

Is that right?


I'm not sure. (To be frank, I hadn't looked at the advisories so far. 
Since no one's answered your question yet, I just had a look at them to 
see if I can throw some light).


The reason I say I am not sure is that if you click on the 
FreeBSD-SA-07:04.file.asc advisory for instance, you'll see that it 
applies to *all* FreeBSD releases. So if you are on the 6.2 release, this 
is one patch you have to apply. I'd suppose there are other patches too 
that similarly might apply to the 6.2 release.


If you are on FreeBSD 6.2, use the freebsd-update tool to keep your system 
up-to-date. That automatically fetches the patches necessary for your 
system. If you are on FreeBSD 5.5, install this tool from ports.


Regards,
Rakhesh
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

A simple question about patches for FreeBSD from http://security.freebsd.org/patches

[PowerMan]

 Dear sir,
  My first language is not English, please forgive me if I made some bad
words. And I do not know if that is the right e-mail address to ask
questions.

 I copy a few lines from http://security.freebsd.org/

   - 
FreeBSD-SA-07:05.libarchive.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-07:04.file.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-07:03.ipv6.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-07:02.bind.asc

FreeBSD 6.2-RELEASE released.

   - 
FreeBSD-SA-07:01.jail.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:26.gtar.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:25.kmem.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:24.libarchive.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:22.openssh.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:23.openssl.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:21.gzip.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:20.bind.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:19.openssl.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:18.ppp.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:17.sendmail.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:16.smbfs.asc
   - 
FreeBSD-SA-06:15.ypserv.asc

FreeBSD 5.5-RELEASE released.

Is that mean if I use 5.5-release, I should apply all the patches above and

if I use 6.2-release I need only apply the
FreeBSD-SA-07:05.libarchive.asc
to
FreeBSD-SA-07:02.bind.asc
?

Is that right?

Thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: a simple question about snapshot, thanks for reply

[Garrett Cooper]

PowerMan wrote:

I guess you mean that:

The snapshots of 6.2 stable released in June 2007
have been patched , 
I can also download patches from http://security.freebsd.org/patches/ 


and apply them to the offical release manually.

Is that right?

thanks.

2007/7/29, Garrett Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>:


PowerMan wrote:
> Dear sir,
>  My first English is not English, please forgive me if I
made some bad
> words
> or expression.
>
>   I have learned from your web site http://www.freebsd.org,
> that version 6.2 is released in 15 Jan, 2007.
>
>   Is that a stable release?
>
>If it is, why there is 6.2-stable snapshots released in
May and June
> 2007?
>
> Should all snapshots be released before a final stable release ?
>
> should no snapshots be released after a final stable release?
>
> I may not express myself very well, I wish you can understand me.
>
> thanks.

That's an official release. A few patched stable releases have
been
done since then to fix security issues, as well as MFC (merged from
current) modifications (new drivers added, etc).

Also, snapshots of the managed CVS branches are done periodically
(legacy, stable, current), which you may or may not have seen.

Patches are made to all supported releases, until their
respective
EoL (end of life) dates, so that's why there are periodic releases.

Cheers,
-Garrett




   Yes, but those are source patches which:

1. Require a source tree.
2. Require a limited (one app and maybe small list of dependencies) to 
major rebuild (extensively used lib that has a lot of dependencies).


More current snapshots have those patches built into them.

Cheers,
-Garrett

PS Please CC questions@ and bottom-post :).
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: a simple question about snapshot, thanks for reply

[Garrett Cooper]

PowerMan wrote:

Dear sir,
 My first English is not English, please forgive me if I made some bad
words
or expression.

  I have learned from your web site http://www.freebsd.org,
that version 6.2 is released in 15 Jan, 2007.

  Is that a stable release?

   If it is, why there is 6.2-stable snapshots released in May and June
2007?

Should all snapshots be released before a final stable release ?

should no snapshots be released after a final stable release?

I may not express myself very well, I wish you can understand me.

thanks.


   That's an official release. A few patched stable releases have been 
done since then to fix security issues, as well as MFC (merged from 
current) modifications (new drivers added, etc).


   Also, snapshots of the managed CVS branches are done periodically 
(legacy, stable, current), which you may or may not have seen.


   Patches are made to all supported releases, until their respective 
EoL (end of life) dates, so that's why there are periodic releases.


Cheers,
-Garrett
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

a simple question about snapshot, thanks for reply

[PowerMan]

Dear sir,
 My first language is not English, please forgive me if I made some bad
words
or expression.

  I have learned from your web site http://www.freebsd.org,
that version 6.2 is released in 15 Jan, 2007.

  Is that a stable release?

   If it is, why there is 6.2-stable snapshots released in May and June
2007?

Should all snapshots be released before a final stable release ?

should no snapshots be released after a final stable release?

I could not express myself very well, I wish you can understand me.

thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

a simple question about snapshot, thanks for reply

[PowerMan]

Dear sir,
 My first English is not English, please forgive me if I made some bad
words
or expression.

  I have learned from your web site http://www.freebsd.org,
that version 6.2 is released in 15 Jan, 2007.

  Is that a stable release?

   If it is, why there is 6.2-stable snapshots released in May and June
2007?

Should all snapshots be released before a final stable release ?

should no snapshots be released after a final stable release?

I may not express myself very well, I wish you can understand me.

thanks.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

RE: Probably a simple question but...

[Mayo, Richard A RDECOM CERDEC STCD SRI]

> -Original Message-
> From: Danial Thom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 11:59 AM
> To: Atom Powers; Mayo, Richard A RDECOM CERDEC STCD SRI
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Probably a simple question but...
> 
> Are you running mrouted?




I'm not.  And when I try, I get an error about the functionality not being 
built into the kernel...

I'm guessing this is my problem.  Any suggestions on how to correct this will 
be greatly appreciated.

Rich Mayo
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Probably a simple question but...

[Danial Thom]

Are you running mrouted? 

--- Atom Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I haven't worked with multicast much, but from
> my understanding you
> may have to join the router to the multicast
> domain.
> 
> On 6/15/06, Mayo, Richard A RDECOM CERDEC STCD
> SRI
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I believe this is a simple fix, but I sure
> can't find it.
> >
> > I set up 2 FreeBSD boxes as dual-stack
> network routers and I'm using them to test an
> application capable of generating both TCP and
> UDP messaging.  The TCP part of this equation
> is working great -- my message fly around the
> network just like they should.
> >
> > However, my routers appear to be eating my
> multicast UDP packets.  The packets are
> addressed to 225.0.0.41 and static routes for
> that prefix are defined in both rc.conf files
> (I only use 1 multicast address, so I don't see
> a reason to use a multicast routing daemon). 
> Obviously, I don't believe the static route is
> defined correctly.
> >
> > Can somebody clue me in to the proper method
> for configuring a FreeBSD computer, functioning
> as a network router, to accept all packets
> addressed to 225.0.0.41 on either Ethernet
> interface and forward them out the other?? 
> (they're RL0 and RL1, lower case.)
> >
> > Do I need to define 2 static routes?
> > Do I need to switch something else on?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for any help,
> > Rich Mayo
> >
> >
> >
> > P.S.  It may be significant that when I
> installed the OS on the computer, there was
> only 1 NIC present.  I added the other one
> after I got the software running, so it occurs
> to me that there may be a switch relating to
> forwarding that's not "ON", but I have no idea
> where to look for that.
> >
> ___
> > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> >
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Perfection is just a word I use occasionally
> with mustard.
> --Atom Powers--
> ___
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
> 


__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: Probably a simple question but...

[Atom Powers]

I haven't worked with multicast much, but from my understanding you
may have to join the router to the multicast domain.

On 6/15/06, Mayo, Richard A RDECOM CERDEC STCD SRI
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I believe this is a simple fix, but I sure can't find it.

I set up 2 FreeBSD boxes as dual-stack network routers and I'm using them to 
test an application capable of generating both TCP and UDP messaging.  The TCP 
part of this equation is working great -- my message fly around the network 
just like they should.

However, my routers appear to be eating my multicast UDP packets.  The packets 
are addressed to 225.0.0.41 and static routes for that prefix are defined in 
both rc.conf files (I only use 1 multicast address, so I don't see a reason to 
use a multicast routing daemon).  Obviously, I don't believe the static route 
is defined correctly.

Can somebody clue me in to the proper method for configuring a FreeBSD 
computer, functioning as a network router, to accept all packets addressed to 
225.0.0.41 on either Ethernet interface and forward them out the other??  
(they're RL0 and RL1, lower case.)

Do I need to define 2 static routes?
Do I need to switch something else on?



Thanks for any help,
Rich Mayo



P.S.  It may be significant that when I installed the OS on the computer, there was only 
1 NIC present.  I added the other one after I got the software running, so it occurs to 
me that there may be a switch relating to forwarding that's not "ON", but I 
have no idea where to look for that.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"




--
--
Perfection is just a word I use occasionally with mustard.
--Atom Powers--
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Probably a simple question but...

[Mayo, Richard A RDECOM CERDEC STCD SRI]

I believe this is a simple fix, but I sure can't find it.

I set up 2 FreeBSD boxes as dual-stack network routers and I'm using them to 
test an application capable of generating both TCP and UDP messaging.  The TCP 
part of this equation is working great -- my message fly around the network 
just like they should.

However, my routers appear to be eating my multicast UDP packets.  The packets 
are addressed to 225.0.0.41 and static routes for that prefix are defined in 
both rc.conf files (I only use 1 multicast address, so I don't see a reason to 
use a multicast routing daemon).  Obviously, I don't believe the static route 
is defined correctly.

Can somebody clue me in to the proper method for configuring a FreeBSD 
computer, functioning as a network router, to accept all packets addressed to 
225.0.0.41 on either Ethernet interface and forward them out the other??  
(they're RL0 and RL1, lower case.)

Do I need to define 2 static routes?
Do I need to switch something else on?



Thanks for any help,
Rich Mayo



P.S.  It may be significant that when I installed the OS on the computer, there 
was only 1 NIC present.  I added the other one after I got the software 
running, so it occurs to me that there may be a switch relating to forwarding 
that's not "ON", but I have no idea where to look for that.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: a simple question...

[Charles Swiger]

On Nov 4, 2005, at 1:12 PM, Javier Matos wrote:
Hello, I´m a student of computer science and this year I must to do  
an application using system calls.
We are using linux system calls like "pid_t fork(void)" and other  
services of the standard POSIX. I want to know if it´s possible to  
use that system calls in FreeBSD because I prefer to improve my use  
of freebsd. I will write my application in C and I have freebsd 5.4  
with linux compability activated.


FreeBSD has a fork() system call of it's own, yes, along with all of  
the other system and library calls from POSIX and ANSI-C standards.   
If you write portable C, you can recompile your program under FreeBSD  
without using Linux emulation.


--
-Chuck

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

a simple question...

[Javier Matos]

Hello, I´m a student of computer science and this year I must to do an 
application using system calls.
We are using linux system calls like "pid_t fork(void)" and other services of 
the standard POSIX. I want to know if it´s possible to use that system calls in 
FreeBSD because I prefer to improve my use of freebsd. I will write my 
application in C and I have freebsd 5.4 with linux compability activated.

Thanks for all!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re[2]: A simple question

[DanGer]

Hello baguio_sun,

Sunday, October 31, 2004, 7:23:06 PM, you wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 11:20:08PM +0600, baguio_sun wrote:
>> Hi!
>> Can anyone tell me the size of folder '/usr/src' when the cvsup is 
>> complete?

> About 350 MB. 


>> I ran cvsup 8 hours ago and it's still running ... my network is very
>> slow... :(

you could get you source from installation CD and then run cvsup. then
it should download only changed files...

> If you have a slow network connection, then it can indeed take a lot of
> time for the initial run of cvsup.  Future runs will be faster, since
> only the changes will be fetched but the first run has to fetch
> everything.

-- 
Best regards

+--==/\/\==--+
| DanGer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ261701668 |
| http://danger.homeunix.org |
+--==\/\/==--+

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: A simple question

[Erik Trulsson]

On Sun, Oct 31, 2004 at 11:20:08PM +0600, baguio_sun wrote:
> Hi!
> Can anyone tell me the size of folder '/usr/src' when the cvsup is 
> complete?

About 350 MB. 


> I ran cvsup 8 hours ago and it's still running ... my network is very 
> slow... :(

If you have a slow network connection, then it can indeed take a lot of
time for the initial run of cvsup.  Future runs will be faster, since
only the changes will be fetched but the first run has to fetch
everything.


-- 

Erik Trulsson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

A simple question

[baguio_sun]

Hi!
Can anyone tell me the size of folder '/usr/src' when the cvsup is 
complete?
I ran cvsup 8 hours ago and it's still running ... my network is very 
slow... :(
Thanks in advance!

___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Re: minimum memory [was: A simple question about FreeBSD]

[Doug Reynolds]

On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 07:17:51 +1100, Sue Blake wrote:

>On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 09:28:14PM -0500, taxman wrote:
>> On Friday 14 March 2003 08:23 pm, Wizard of Wor wrote:
>> > I was unable to find the minimum requirements on x86 platform. Can I
>> > run FreeBSD on mz 486dx2 8Mb laptop smoothly?
>> 
>> The install documentation or the FAQ does have this answer, but yes you should 
>> be able to run fine on this machine.  Just don't try to install X windows, 
>> unless you set up a *lot* of swap.  It also depends a little bit on if there 
>> is any noncooperative hardware on the machine.  Laptops tend to have some of 
>> that.  Best bet is to try it.  4.x will probably work the best for you.
>
>
>This memory question comes up a lot, and I'm not sure how up to date
>that part of the documentation is. Has anyone _definitely_ run an
>install on a machine with only 8MB in the last couple of years?
>
>Twice I have failed to install (boot floppy with CD) to machines with
>only 8MB RAM. It could have been FreeBSD 4.4, but I think it was
>FreeBSD 3.3. I'd love to discover that I'm wrong here.
>
>Of course the alternative is to put the disk in another machine to do
>the install, then it should run OK back in the 8MB machine. As for X,
>forget trying it. If it was installed it "would run" but not usably,
>no matter how much swap. Without X and with plenty of swap you can do
>a lot with your 8MB in text mode if you can get an installation going.
>I had a 386 with 8MB running FreeBSD 2.x (without X) that ran much
>faster than the NT4 pentium beside it. The 486 CPU should be fine.

AFAIK, you need 12meg to install, but only 8 to run.

I wouldnt run it will less than 16 or 24.  I had 28 megs in a old
486-133, and 4.3-release ran great.

---
doug reynolds | the maverick | [EMAIL PROTECTED]



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: minimum memory [was: A simple question about FreeBSD]

[Vallo Kallaste]

On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 07:17:51AM +1100, Sue Blake
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> This memory question comes up a lot, and I'm not sure how up to date
> that part of the documentation is. Has anyone _definitely_ run an
> install on a machine with only 8MB in the last couple of years?
> 
> Twice I have failed to install (boot floppy with CD) to machines with
> only 8MB RAM. It could have been FreeBSD 4.4, but I think it was
> FreeBSD 3.3. I'd love to discover that I'm wrong here.
> 
> Of course the alternative is to put the disk in another machine to do
> the install, then it should run OK back in the 8MB machine. As for X,
> forget trying it. If it was installed it "would run" but not usably,
> no matter how much swap. Without X and with plenty of swap you can do
> a lot with your 8MB in text mode if you can get an installation going.
> I had a 386 with 8MB running FreeBSD 2.x (without X) that ran much
> faster than the NT4 pentium beside it. The 486 CPU should be fine.

Even 4.4 didn't install using standard release floppies and 8MB of
memory. I had to build custom stripped down kernel. Otherwise 8MB
and 80Mhz 486 has plenty of power to run home DSL gateway with IP
firewall, ssh, ftpd and whatnot. Of course the bandwidth of your DSL
connection matters, if you have 8Mbit/s connection you must use
netgraph/mpd.
-- 

Vallo Kallaste

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

minimum memory [was: A simple question about FreeBSD]

[Sue Blake]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 09:28:14PM -0500, taxman wrote:
> On Friday 14 March 2003 08:23 pm, Wizard of Wor wrote:
> > I was unable to find the minimum requirements on x86 platform. Can I
> > run FreeBSD on mz 486dx2 8Mb laptop smoothly?
> 
> The install documentation or the FAQ does have this answer, but yes you should 
> be able to run fine on this machine.  Just don't try to install X windows, 
> unless you set up a *lot* of swap.  It also depends a little bit on if there 
> is any noncooperative hardware on the machine.  Laptops tend to have some of 
> that.  Best bet is to try it.  4.x will probably work the best for you.


This memory question comes up a lot, and I'm not sure how up to date
that part of the documentation is. Has anyone _definitely_ run an
install on a machine with only 8MB in the last couple of years?

Twice I have failed to install (boot floppy with CD) to machines with
only 8MB RAM. It could have been FreeBSD 4.4, but I think it was
FreeBSD 3.3. I'd love to discover that I'm wrong here.

Of course the alternative is to put the disk in another machine to do
the install, then it should run OK back in the 8MB machine. As for X,
forget trying it. If it was installed it "would run" but not usably,
no matter how much swap. Without X and with plenty of swap you can do
a lot with your 8MB in text mode if you can get an installation going.
I had a 386 with 8MB running FreeBSD 2.x (without X) that ran much
faster than the NT4 pentium beside it. The 486 CPU should be fine.


-- 

Regards,
-*Sue*-

 
 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: A simple question about FreeBSD

[taxman]

On Friday 14 March 2003 08:23 pm, Wizard of Wor wrote:
> I was unable to find the minimum requirements on x86 platform. Can I
> run FreeBSD on mz 486dx2 8Mb laptop smoothly?

The install documentation or the FAQ does have this answer, but yes you should 
be able to run fine on this machine.  Just don't try to install X windows, 
unless you set up a *lot* of swap.  It also depends a little bit on if there 
is any noncooperative hardware on the machine.  Laptops tend to have some of 
that.  Best bet is to try it.  4.x will probably work the best for you.

Tim



To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

A simple question about FreeBSD

[Wizard of Wor]

I was unable to find the minimum requirements on x86 platform. Can I 
run FreeBSD on mz 486dx2 8Mb laptop smoothly?

Please help me by answering this simple question.

regards,
wauf

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: a simple question about ports

[Cliff Sarginson]

On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 01:42:31PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 12:39:13PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > > > Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?
> > > Lots of different reasons, the most likely one being that they
> > > compiled fine on the committers box.
> > And aye there's the rub.
> 
> I've found that most maintainers are willing to try and fix ports that
> don't compile in your environment. You can't expect a bug to be fixed
> unless you report it to someone who can fix it.
> 
Let us straighten a few things out here, the perpetuation of this kind of
nonsense puts us back in the dark Lord of Redmond world.

A language is a language. Ok GCC has groovy extras to allow FreeBSD and
Linux to compile.  
I expect that "Hello. world" will compile   
link and run .. yes ?
Does it matter very much what CPU I have, how much memory etc..?
Linking, Now we have another story.
It is quite educational to find thet KDE has a dependency on a game
program ;) Yup it sure does.
I know people put in precious spare time to just about the best OS on
the planet.
But "portupgrade" just does not hack it.
Ok. End of story. Otherwise I will get banned again by the inner corpus.
Let us make it better.

-- 
Regards
   Cliff

[ This mail has been checked as virus-free ]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: a simple question about ports

[Mike Meyer]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 12:39:13PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > > Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?
> > Lots of different reasons, the most likely one being that they
> > compiled fine on the committers box.
> And aye there's the rub.

I've found that most maintainers are willing to try and fix ports that
don't compile in your environment. You can't expect a bug to be fixed
unless you report it to someone who can fix it.

  http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: a simple question about ports

[Cliff Sarginson]

On Sun, Mar 02, 2003 at 12:39:13PM -0600, Mike Meyer wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?
> 
> Lots of different reasons, the most likely one being that they
> compiled file on the committers box.
> 
And aye there's the rub.

-- 
Regards
   Cliff

[ This mail has been checked as virus-free ]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: a simple question about ports

[Dan Nelson]

In the last episode (Mar 02), Cliff Sarginson said:
> Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?

More details please.

-- 
Dan Nelson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

Re: a simple question about ports

[Mike Meyer]

In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Cliff Sarginson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?

Lots of different reasons, the most likely one being that they
compiled file on the committers box.

  http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information.

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message

a simple question about ports

[Cliff Sarginson]

Why are ports sometimes released, when they are uncompileable ?

-- 
Regards
   Cliff

[ This mail has been checked as virus-free ]

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message