In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Patrick M. Hausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but now we have three different ways to update:
[...]
2. call cvsup from /usr/local/etc/periodic with supfiles for whatever you
need ...
Not a good idea. Add a new crontab entry instead. If everybody used
Why does "make update" in /usr/src also include a cvsup of /usr/ports?
Since /usr/ports and /usr/docs have Makefiles and "update" targets
of their own, and the alternative update by cvs doesn't cover
/usr/ports either, I suggest to remove the /usr/ports cvsup from
Makefile.inc1's "update"
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 10:31:17PM +0100, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
Why does "make update" in /usr/src also include a cvsup of /usr/ports?
Since /usr/ports and /usr/docs have Makefiles and "update" targets
of their own, and the alternative update by cvs doesn't cover
/usr/ports either, I
Hi all!
Bill Fumerola wrote:
On Mon, Feb 07, 2000 at 10:31:17PM +0100, Christian Weisgerber wrote:
Why does "make update" in /usr/src also include a cvsup of /usr/ports?
Since /usr/ports and /usr/docs have Makefiles and "update" targets
of their own, and the alternative update by
Bill Fumerola [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As the person who implemented PORTSSUPFILE, I'd object. Originally
SUPFILE2 was set to the ports-supfile, so to preserve original
behavior (that is, updating ports along with src/) that stayed in.
Very well.
To some of us, updating both at the same
