Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
number ,
is it not possible to use the newest version number in place of Current
when it is branched .
Such a change will prevent unnecessary renaming problems .
For everyone , it i very easy to understand that
On Friday, November 11, 2011 07:29:46 AM Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
-(snipped stuff)-
This is preventing testing and / or using efforts .
I know , it is possible to rename local link names , but
everyone is not so much knowledgeable .
Thank you very much .
Mehmet Erol Sanliturk
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Chuck Burns brea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2011 07:29:46 AM Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
-(snipped stuff)-
This is preventing testing and / or using efforts .
I know , it is possible to rename local link names , but
everyone is not
On Friday, November 11, 2011 08:17:52 AM you wrote:
-snip-
My sentence is NOT about Current , but 9.0 RC1 .
Perhaps , you will NOT say , if a person is NOT knowledgeable , he should
NOT use 9.0 RC1 .
If you use a proper RC, then pkg_add will work until a new RC, and since there
is no binary
Chuck Burns wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2011 08:17:52 AM you wrote:
-snip-
My sentence is NOT about Current , but 9.0 RC1 .
Perhaps , you will NOT say , if a person is NOT knowledgeable , he should
NOT use 9.0 RC1 .
If you use a proper RC, then pkg_add will work until a new RC, and since
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Miroslav Lachman 000.f...@quip.cz wrote:
Chuck Burns wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2011 08:17:52 AM you wrote:
-snip-
My sentence is NOT about Current , but 9.0 RC1 .
Perhaps , you will NOT say , if a person is NOT knowledgeable , he should
NOT use 9.0 RC1
George Kontostanos schreef:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Miroslav Lachman000.f...@quip.cz wrote:
Chuck Burns wrote:
On Friday, November 11, 2011 08:17:52 AM you wrote:
-snip-
My sentence is NOT about Current , but 9.0 RC1 .
Perhaps , you will NOT say , if a person is NOT knowledgeable ,
If FreeBSD starts using numbers for HEAD/CURRENT, i think a lot of users
would find them selves in a situation
that they download version 10 in this case and that they are using a
develepment version instead of a real release version.
Assuming there will be link from main page - probably
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
number ,
is it not possible to use the newest version number in place of Current
when it is branched .
Such a change will prevent unnecessary renaming problems
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
number ,
is it not possible to use the newest version number in place of Current
On 11/11/2011 20:33, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
number ,
is it not possible to
On 11/11/2011 21:07, Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
On 11/11/2011 20:33, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a
On 11/11/2011 04:29, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
pkg_add -r *
is giving error about directory not found .
This is preventing testing and / or using efforts .
I see your perspective on this, but package support for HEAD (N-current)
is always done on a best effort basis, and is
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Benjamin Kaduk ka...@mit.edu wrote:
On Fri, 11 Nov 2011, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
Dear all ,
Instead of using Current and then renaming everything for a new version
number ,
is it not possible to use the newest version number in place of Current
when
On 11/11/2011 14:23, George Kontostanos wrote:
BTW I follow both stable and current lists. I have noticed that people
still ask questions in current regarding 9-RC(*) problems.
Maybe if it was clear that current is now 10 this would not happen.
Actually up until the actual release we encourage
15 matches
Mail list logo