On 12/04/2012 11:09, Chris Rees wrote:
Chris, I did misread your email-- portmanager appears absolutely fine,
and is in no danger of removal :)
That's good to know thank you. Sorry, portupgrade to portmanager was a
bit of a sneaky corner.
Chris
__
Am 12.04.2012 22:02, schrieb Jerry:
> On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:13:54 +0100
> Chris Whitehouse articulated:
>
>> I'm only a lurker and lowly user but could I humbly request that
>> portmanager is brought back into use? It's simple to use and does
>> what it does extremely well and without fuss. I th
On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:13:54 +0100
Chris Whitehouse articulated:
> I'm only a lurker and lowly user but could I humbly request that
> portmanager is brought back into use? It's simple to use and does
> what it does extremely well and without fuss. I think the fact that
> it still "just works" aft
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/12/2012 04:57 AM, Chris Rees wrote:
> Unfortunately, many of us do not find that it 'just works'. There
> is no-one to ask for support, so people resort to asking ports@ or
> in IRC.
>
> It is also unmaintained, and has many bugs against it:
I
On 12 April 2012 10:03, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> On 12/04/2012 10:57, Chris Rees wrote:
>>> I'm only a lurker and lowly user but could I humbly request that portmanager
>>> > is brought back into use? It's simple to use and does what it does
>>> > extremely
>>> > well and without fuss. I think the
On 12/04/2012 10:57, Chris Rees wrote:
>> I'm only a lurker and lowly user but could I humbly request that portmanager
>> > is brought back into use? It's simple to use and does what it does
>> > extremely
>> > well and without fuss. I think the fact that it still "just works" after
>> > all
>> >
On 12 April 2012 09:13, Chris Whitehouse wrote:
> On 12/04/2012 04:41, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
>>
>> On 04/12/12 03:39, Eitan Adler wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11 April 2012 21:55, Bryan Drewery wrote:
Hi Phillip,
Your last commit on portupgrade [1] indicates to consider portmaster
>>
On 12/04/2012 04:41, Philip M. Gollucci wrote:
On 04/12/12 03:39, Eitan Adler wrote:
On 11 April 2012 21:55, Bryan Drewery wrote:
Hi Phillip,
Your last commit on portupgrade [1] indicates to consider portmaster
instead. What are the thoughts on this? Just the lack of a maintainer?
Open PRs
On 04/12/12 03:39, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 11 April 2012 21:55, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> Hi Phillip,
>>
>> Your last commit on portupgrade [1] indicates to consider portmaster
>> instead. What are the thoughts on this? Just the lack of a maintainer?
>
> Open PRs that indicate long lasting bugs wit
On 11 April 2012 21:55, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Hi Phillip,
>
> Your last commit on portupgrade [1] indicates to consider portmaster
> instead. What are the thoughts on this? Just the lack of a maintainer?
Open PRs that indicate long lasting bugs with no upstream maintainer.
If you would like to p
Hi Phillip,
Your last commit on portupgrade [1] indicates to consider portmaster
instead. What are the thoughts on this? Just the lack of a maintainer?
I was considering writing/submitting a patch to support pkgng with
portupgrade.
1.
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=719045+0+/usr/loc
11 matches
Mail list logo
