On Fri, Jun 08, 2007 at 12:20:15PM +1000, Warren Liddell wrote:
Running FreeBSD 6.2-STABLE - CVSUP ran approx 12 hrs ago ... this is
one of 99 port packages that fail. Any assistance as to whats
happening would be appreciated.
===
XFree86 4.x has been completely
-to-date with port
php5-pgsql-5.2.2= up-to-date with port
php5-posix-5.2.2_3 = up-to-date with port
php5-readline-5.2.2 = up-to-date with port
php5-session-5.2.2 = up-to-date with port
php5-simplexml-5.2.0 needs updating (port has 5.2.2
after you are familiar with the process and assumes using twm which is built
into Xorg. If Xorg needs updating that must be done from the console. Xorg takes
just a few minutes if a current version is available on cdrom.
Using portupgrade with the noexecute option will give a sense of how complex
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Saturday, May 19, 2007 23:51:35 -0500 Jack Barnett
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For /usr/ports I sync to just '.' (dot). Is that what I want? (I want just
'stable' ports, nothing bleeding edge).
for /usr/src I
Jack Barnett wrote:
For /usr/ports I sync to just '.' (dot). Is that what I want?
(I want just 'stable' ports, nothing bleeding edge).
for /usr/src I sync to: RELENG_6
But my question, is there a way to go though and say let's rebuild any
port that is newer (via sync) then one I current
Jack Barnett writes:
For /usr/ports I sync to just '.' (dot). Is that what I want?
(I want just 'stable' ports, nothing bleeding edge).
for /usr/src I sync to: RELENG_6
But my question, is there a way to go though and say let's
rebuild any port that is newer (via sync) then
hi,
while executing
portupgrade -Rf libXft
i noticed that it starts to build some oxrg7.2 stuff, is this the way it
should be??
thanks!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 08:18:22AM -0400, Tsu-Fan Cheng wrote:
hi,
while executing
portupgrade -Rf libXft
i noticed that it starts to build some oxrg7.2 stuff, is this the way it
should be??
Yes. In fact this is part of the reason it has to be done specially
(portupgrade gets the
For /usr/ports I sync to just '.' (dot). Is that what I want?
(I want just 'stable' ports, nothing bleeding edge).
for /usr/src I sync to: RELENG_6
But my question, is there a way to go though and say let's rebuild any
port that is newer (via sync) then one I current have?
For example,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- --On Saturday, May 19, 2007 23:51:35 -0500 Jack Barnett
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
For /usr/ports I sync to just '.' (dot). Is that what I want? (I want just
'stable' ports, nothing bleeding edge).
for /usr/src I sync to: RELENG_6
But my
Simon Castillo wrote:
Hi all:
I installed Freebsd ver 6.2 couple months ago in a Pentium III computer. I configured samba, gnome and couple other applications.
Couple days ago I decided to update the ports. For this I use portmanager -u
-l (after updating the port list).
Up to know, I
On Fri, 11 May 2007 01:45:47 -0500
WizLayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could be wrong as I haven't used portmanager in a while (and that
was only a short time)... I believe that by default, portmanager
doesn't update dependencies more than a depth of 1 (maybe two?)
unless you use the -p
Hi,
Since 6.2 is released, how can one update ports on 6.1? at leasst to
the maximum possible updates that was available for 6.1 till it was
released?
Thankyou so much :-)
Kind regards
Siju
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi
Ports are not release-dependent. Just use the default ports-supfile and you'll
get the most up-to-date ports tree, regardless of the release you're running.
Firas
On Friday 11 May 2007 15:31:09 Siju George wrote:
Hi,
Since 6.2 is released, how can one update ports on 6.1? at leasst to
On Fri, 11 May 2007 19:01:09 +0530
Siju George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Since 6.2 is released, how can one update ports on 6.1? at leasst to
the maximum possible updates that was available for 6.1 till it was
released?
The ports tree isn't branched, so you should be able to use the
Hi Gerard:
I tried your suggestion and I still have the same result. It updated couple
more files, but the error (missing library) is still there.
Any other suggestion?
Thanks in advance
Simon
Gerard Seibert [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: On Fri, 11 May 2007 01:45:47 -0500
WizLayer wrote:
I
On Friday 11 May 2007 11:23:11 am Simon Castillo wrote:
Hi Gerard:
I tried your suggestion and I still have the same result. It updated
couple more files, but the error (missing library) is still there.
Any other suggestion?
Thanks in advance
Simon
Gerard Seibert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
III computer. I
configured samba, gnome and couple other applications.
Couple days ago I decided to update the ports. For this I use portmanager -u
-l (after updating the port list).
After the update, I starting having problems with my samba server and my gnome
is no working anymore. After
On Fri, 11 May 2007 11:23:11 -0500 (CDT)
Simon Castillo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried your suggestion and I still have the same result. It updated
couple more files, but the error (missing library) is still there.
Assuming your ports tree is up to date, try running:
pkgdb -Ffv
Hi WizLayer:
Nope, no particular reason to use portmanager. I guess I'll one more that
suffer a bad experience. I don't see any other solution than re-install every
thing again.
Thanks
Simon
WizLayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: On Friday 11 May 2007 11:23:11 am Simon
Castillo wrote:
Hi
On Friday 11 May 2007 04:00:15 pm you wrote:
WizLayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió: On Friday 11 May 2007 11:23:11 am
Simon Castillo wrote:
Gerard Seibert escribió: On Fri, 11 May 2007
01:45:47 -0500
WizLayer wrote:
I could be wrong as I haven't used portmanager in a while (and
Hi all:
I installed Freebsd ver 6.2 couple months ago in a Pentium III computer. I
configured samba, gnome and couple other applications.
Couple days ago I decided to update the ports. For this I use portmanager -u
-l (after updating the port list).
After the update, I starting having
updating the port list).
After the update, I starting having problems with my samba server and my
gnome is no working anymore. After digging in the logs and found this
error that seems to be the root cause:
/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object libgnutls.so.13 not found, required
by libcups.so.2
im still working on updating 2 jails. i nullfs mounted /usr/src /usr/obj from
my host into my jails, and tried to installworld, but got this error:
=== lib/libcrypt (install)
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libcrypt.a /usr/lib
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libcrypt_p.a /usr/lib
Jonathan Horne wrote:
im still working on updating 2 jails. i nullfs mounted /usr/src /usr/obj
from my host into my jails, and tried to installworld, but got this error:
=== lib/libcrypt (install)
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libcrypt.a /usr/lib
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444
On 31/03/07, Jonathan Horne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
im still working on updating 2 jails. i nullfs mounted /usr/src /usr/obj from
my host into my jails, and tried to installworld, but got this error:
=== lib/libcrypt (install)
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libcrypt.a /usr/lib
install
Jonathan Horne wrote:
im still working on updating 2 jails. i nullfs mounted /usr/src /usr/obj
from my host into my jails, and tried to installworld, but got this error:
=== lib/libcrypt (install)
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444 libcrypt.a /usr/lib
install -C -o root -g wheel -m 444
While updating my ports, I've run into a problem. portversion shows
php5-interbase needs updating, but when I ran 'portupgrade
php5-interbase' I got the message: '== Please do not build firebird
as 'root' because this may cause conflicts with SysV semaphores of
running services' ... 'Stop
On Mar 27, 2007, at 12:12 AM, Don O'Neil wrote:
If they are 'ports' specificly built for FreeBSD, shouldn't the port
maintainer make them install like the originals were? Makes sense
to me
Or maybe the original install/release needs to be changed to
install the
same as the port.
I did... So I linked it to /etc/named.conf Everything works great
now...
My question is howver, why are the ports setup different than the
original
install? I would think that the port build would be set with the
same
options as the original install that came with the OS... I've seen
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Crist
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 5:10 AM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updating Bind OpenSSL on 6.1-Stable/Release
On Mar 27, 2007, at 12:12 AM, Don O'Neil wrote:
If they are 'ports' specificly built for FreeBSD, shouldn't the port
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric
Crist Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2007 5:10 AM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updating Bind OpenSSL on 6.1-Stable/Release
On Mar 27, 2007, at 12:12 AM, Don O'Neil wrote:
If they are 'ports' specificly
Hi all...
I'm having some difficulty updating OpenSSL 0.9.8e and Bind 9.3.4... I've
tried both the packages and the original source... The problem is this..
My bind install that came on the 6.1 installation runs from /usr/bin,
whereas both the package and the source want to run from /usr/local
My bind install that came on the 6.1 installation runs from
/usr/bin,
whereas both the package and the source want to run from
/usr/local/bin...
You should have named.conf in /etc/namedb unless there's something
funny with the original install. Not sure if you need to run
make-localhost
To: Don O'Neil; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updating Bind OpenSSL on 6.1-Stable/Release
My bind install that came on the 6.1 installation runs from /usr/bin,
whereas both the package and the source want to run from
/usr/local/bin...
You should have named.conf in /etc/namedb unless
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, March 26, 2007 1:34 PM
To: Don O'Neil; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updating Bind OpenSSL on 6.1-Stable/Release
My bind install that came on the 6.1 installation runs from /usr/bin,
whereas both the package and the source want to run from
/usr
:13 PM
To: Don O'Neil
Cc: 'Reko Turja'; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Updating Bind OpenSSL on 6.1-Stable/Release
Don O'Neil wrote:
I did... So I linked it to /etc/named.conf Everything works great
now...
My question is howver, why are the ports setup different than
Hi
Why is it that the binary files are so long about being updated?
On OpenBSD and on most major GNU/Linux distros the binary packages are updated
very quickly. I am asking the question to understand the reason behind the
FreeBSD choice to give this a low priority.
Best regards.
Rico
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 14:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, White Hat wrote:
--- Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 22, 2007, at 12:34 PM, White Hat wrote:
Add:
CC?= /usr/local/bin/gcc
CXX?=/usr/local/bin/g++
...to /etc/make.conf.
FreeBSD-6.2
The installed version is gcc-3.4.6, while the ports
have version 4.3.0 available. If I install the newer
version will it replace the older version? If not and
I don't think it will, how do I force the use of the
newer version of Gcc when making a port? I tried
Googling for this but
On Mar 22, 2007, at 11:55 AM, White Hat wrote:
The installed version is gcc-3.4.6, while the ports
have version 4.3.0 available. If I install the newer
version will it replace the older version?
Nope.
If not and I don't think it will, how do I force the use of the
newer version of Gcc when
In the last episode (Mar 22), White Hat said:
FreeBSD-6.2
The installed version is gcc-3.4.6, while the ports have version
4.3.0 available. If I install the newer version will it replace the
older version? If not and I don't think it will, how do I force the
use of the newer version of Gcc
--- Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 22, 2007, at 12:34 PM, White Hat wrote:
Add:
CC?= /usr/local/bin/gcc
CXX?= /usr/local/bin/g++
...to /etc/make.conf. You might also find
looking
at /usr/ports/Mk/
bsd.gcc.mk to be informative...
Thanks! One other
On Thu, 22 Mar 2007, White Hat wrote:
--- Chuck Swiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 22, 2007, at 12:34 PM, White Hat wrote:
Add:
CC?=/usr/local/bin/gcc
CXX?= /usr/local/bin/g++
...to /etc/make.conf. You might also find
looking
at /usr/ports/Mk/
bsd.gcc.mk to be informative...
Hello,
I am facing a problem when I try to update cacti :
=== Extracting for cacti-0.8.6j.3_1
= MD5 Checksum OK for cacti-0.8.6j.tar.gz.
= SHA256 Checksum OK for cacti-0.8.6j.tar.gz.
= MD5 Checksum OK for ping_php_version4_snmpgetnext.patch.
= SHA256 Checksum OK for
I see from the latest announcement that freebsd-update is now in the base system
for 6.2. Following the links I see there's a procedure for 6.0-61. and another
for 6.1-6.2 binary updating.
In the past I have always dumped all my files and /etc /usr/local/etc done a
completely fresh install
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 03:38:18PM +, Robin Becker wrote:
I see from the latest announcement that freebsd-update is now in the base
system for 6.2. Following the links I see there's a procedure for 6.0-61.
and another for 6.1-6.2 binary updating.
In the past I have always dumped all
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 03:38:18PM +, Robin Becker wrote:
.
What you want to do is a cvsup (Mathew Seaman recently pointed out csup
that is supposed to be part of the system, but I don't seem to have it
on the machine I am presently on running 6.1) so
Jerry McAllister wrote:
Hello Robin,
I see from the latest announcement that freebsd-update is now in the base
system for 6.2. Following the links I see there's a procedure for 6.0-61.
and another for 6.1-6.2 binary updating.
By the way, I see that your post says binary update, but I
and it works fine. The other is FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE with
bind9-base-9.3.4, not sure what the base difference is, can someone tell
me? This 5.4 server is not updating when changes are made to the
primary. I see in the logs on the primary that notifies are sent and the
9.3.3 server, which
with
bind9-base-9.3.4, not sure what the base difference is, can someone tell
me? This 5.4 server is not updating when changes are made to the
primary. I see in the logs on the primary that notifies are sent and the
9.3.3 server, which is at a different facility, updates within minutes,
the 5.4 machine
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 10:00 -0600, Derek Ragona wrote:
I run multiple FreeBSD versions with Bind and have not had a problem with
records being updated. Are you properly setting the new serial numbers in
the master record files?
Thanks. Do you mean the master zone files where the BSD
After updating from 6.1 to 6.2, I went and tried to update my installed
ports. After running portsnap, I ran portmanager, which updated
everything save proftpd. This was over a week ago. Since that time,
I've tried to update proftpd on a few occasions with the same failed
result. The issue
On Tuesday January 30, 2007 at 09:48:38 (AM) Greg Groth wrote:
I've tried to download the file manually, but have only been able to
connect to ftp://ftp.fastorama.com/mirrors/ftp.proftpd.org. When I
download the file from that site, I get a checksum mismatch. Attempts
to FTP to
On 1/30/2007 9:37 AM, Gerard Seibert wrote:
On Tuesday January 30, 2007 at 09:48:38 (AM) Greg Groth wrote:
I've tried to download the file manually, but have only been able to
connect to ftp://ftp.fastorama.com/mirrors/ftp.proftpd.org. When I
download the file from that site, I get a
On 03 Jan José G. Juanino wrote:
I read in the UPDATING file:
###
gnutls has been updated to 1.6.1 and all shared libraries' versions have
been bumped. So you need to rebuild all applications that depend on
gnutls. Do something like:
portupgrade -rf gnutls
###
I run pkg_glob -r
I read in the UPDATING file:
###
gnutls has been updated to 1.6.1 and all shared libraries' versions
have been bumped. So you need to rebuild all applications that
depend on gnutls. Do something like:
portupgrade -rf gnutls
###
I run pkg_glob -r gnutls-1.4.5 and get 42 packages, including
k3b
In the last episode (Jan 04), Jos G. Juanino said:
I read in the UPDATING file:
###
gnutls has been updated to 1.6.1 and all shared libraries' versions
have been bumped. So you need to rebuild all applications that
depend on gnutls. Do something like:
###
I run pkg_glob -r gnutls-1.4.5
for multimedia/audacious
=== audacious-1.1.2 has a different PREFIX: /usr/X11R6, skipping
Any ideas on how I can deinstall this port? I checked
/usr/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my text search).
Best regards,
Greg Groth
from the ports directory I get:
=== Deinstalling for multimedia/audacious
=== audacious-1.1.2 has a different PREFIX: /usr/X11R6, skipping
Any ideas on how I can deinstall this port? I checked
/usr/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my text search
/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my text search).
Portupgrade or portmaster are your friends.
In this case does not work, as audacious must be deinstalling before
install the new version. Greg, try pkg_delete or pkg_deinstall audacious
before upgrade.
Regards
running make deinstall from the ports directory I get:
=== Deinstalling for multimedia/audacious
=== audacious-1.1.2 has a different PREFIX: /usr/X11R6, skipping
Any ideas on how I can deinstall this port? I checked
/usr/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my
/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my text search).
Portupgrade or portmaster are your friends.
In this case does not work, as audacious must be deinstalling before
install the new version. Greg, try pkg_delete or pkg_deinstall audacious
before upgrade
the old version.
When running make deinstall from the ports directory I get:
=== Deinstalling for multimedia/audacious
=== audacious-1.1.2 has a different PREFIX: /usr/X11R6, skipping
Any ideas on how I can deinstall this port? I checked
/usr/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless
/ports/UPDATING, but didn't seem to find anything (unless I made a
typo in my text search).
Portupgrade or portmaster are your friends.
It failed with portmanager, so I tried portupgrade to see what the
problem was. When I ran portupgrade, I got the following:
Note: Configure has
.
It also got me errors while trying to recompile OpenSSH from the
source, says it can't find the libs. Though I don't want help right
now in updating OpenSSH, I want now to remove the new OpenSSL
installation and take advantage from the ports system. Is it possible
to completely remove this failed
.
It also got me errors while trying to recompile OpenSSH from the
source, says it can't find the libs. Though I don't want help right
now in updating OpenSSH, I want now to remove the new OpenSSL
installation and take advantage from the ports system. Is it possible
to completely remove this failed
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 10:37:04PM -0500, ajm wrote:
Try the following as root or su to root
cd /usr/ports/multimedia/mplayer
make config
then deselect from the menu the Win32 option
make install clean
note: you will not have win32 codecs support
Normally with mplayer I just
On Tuesday 17 October 2006 14:32, Filippo Moretti wrote:
When I tried portupgrade mplayer it failed with the following message
== mplayer-0.99.8_5 depends on file:
/usr/local/lib/win32/win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 - not found
===Verifying reinstall for
When I tried portupgrade mplayer it failed with the following message
== mplayer-0.99.8_5 depends on file:
/usr/local/lib/win32/win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 - not found
===Verifying reinstall for
/usr/local/lib/win32/win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 in
/usr/ports/multimedia/win32-codecs
===
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:32:25 +0200
Filippo Moretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
===Verifying reinstall for
/usr/local/lib/win32/win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 in
/usr/ports/multimedia/win32-codecs
=== win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 is forbidden: Remote code execution:
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 12:30:59AM +1000, Norberto Meijome wrote:
On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:32:25 +0200
Filippo Moretti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
===Verifying reinstall for
/usr/local/lib/win32/win32-codecs-3.1.0.p8_1,1 in
/usr/ports/multimedia/win32-codecs
===
Hi
We have an infrastructure composed by a few physical servers that
contains some full jails (up to 10 jails per server). I am wondering
what's the better and fastest way to bring the jails up-to-date when
a new patchlevel or minor version is released and installed on the
host system.
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:24:22 +0200
futhwo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We have an infrastructure composed by a few physical servers that
contains some full jails (up to 10 jails per server). I am wondering
what's the better and fastest way to bring the jails up-to-date when
a new patchlevel
*
echo * *
echo ***
echo
echo
for jid in `/usr/sbin/jls | /usr/bin/cut -c 1-6`; do
if [ $jid != JID ]; then
echo Updating:
echo `/usr/sbin/jls | /usr/bin/grep JID`
echo `/usr/sbin/jls | /usr/bin/grep $jid `
echo
Hi there,
What is the procedure to make active changes made to /etc/natd.conf?
Sometimes, restarting the natd process with an HUP drops my connection.
Other times the restart didn't seem to make any difference. The only
way I've ever updated natd rules was to restart the server and never
On Jul 14, 2006, at 4:00 PM, Darek M wrote:
What is the procedure to make active changes made to /etc/natd.conf?
Sometimes, restarting the natd process with an HUP drops my
connection. Other times the restart didn't seem to make any
difference. The only way I've ever updated natd rules
On a pentium 4 server I updated from 6.0 to 6.1 according to the
suggested procedure:
# 1. `cd /usr/src' (or to the directory
containing your source tree).
# 2. `make buildworld'
# 3. `make
buildkernel
# 4. `make installkernel
# 5. `reboot' .
# 6.
`mergemaster -p'
# 7. `make installworld'
#
Perhaps someone may help me, I've successfully cvsup'd the src for the
6.1 rc1 release ran make buildworld and now when I initiate make
buildkernel it halts as shown below. Any ideas? is there a way I can
exclude this compilation?
mkdep -f .depend -a -nostdinc -D_KERNEL -DKLD_MODULE -I-
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 05:38:43PM +, Huy Ton That wrote:
Perhaps someone may help me, I've successfully cvsup'd the src for the
6.1 rc1 release ran make buildworld and now when I initiate make
buildkernel it halts as shown below. Any ideas? is there a way I can
exclude this compilation?
that is going to upgrade the entire system (as I
said - probably a good idea but I just don't want to do that now, I just
want to update my ports).
Can't I just update the ports without updating the entire system? If so, am
I going about it the right way or am I just plain confused? If I am going
idea but I just don't want to do that now, I just
want to update my ports).
Can't I just update the ports without updating the entire system?
Yes. Look at /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile
You _are_ on the right track, and you can do what you want.
--
Bill Moran
Collaborative Fusion Inc
Can't I just update the ports without updating the entire system?
Yes. Look at /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile
You _are_ on the right track, and you can do what you want.
Thanks Bill. Duh, I was looking right at that and didn't see the
ports-supfile. I'll go take a look now
e.g.
would update your files in /usr/src, your system's source tree.
Can't I just update the ports without updating the entire system?
Yes, see above.
I'ld appreciate it if someone on this list could straighten out my
thinking.
You're on the right track. Maybe check out the handbook again
system, you have the sources available and can do that. But
don't worry, there's nothing wrong with having the most up to date
base source, even if you haven't upgraded in a couple months.
I use portsnap for updating my ports tree. I wish I could tell you
the advantages, but I've been using
Hi again,
One last question and I think I'll be good to go:
In my ports-supfile, I've changed the host to one that is local to me in the
USA. Do I need to make any changes to
*default release=cvs tag=.
*default delete use-rel-suffix
Or can I just leave these as the defaults? I understand
Nope, you're good to go
On 3/14/06, Lisa Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi again,
One last question and I think I'll be good to go:
In my ports-supfile, I've changed the host to one that is local to me in the
USA. Do I need to make any changes to
*default release=cvs tag=.
*default
On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 15:05:32 -0500
Lisa Casey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi again,
One last question and I think I'll be good to go:
In my ports-supfile, I've changed the host to one that is local to me in the
USA. Do I need to make any changes to
*default release=cvs tag=.
This line
Hi,
Nope, you're good to go
It worked. Now I have an updated ports collection and I'm feeling pleased
with myself :-)
Thanks guys.
Lisa Casey
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Daniel A. wrote:
So, basically, if I want the newest version of OpenSSH running on my
system, I have to not use the one shipped with 6.0-RELEASE, and
install OpenSSH from ports?
Please don't toppost.
Installing from ports you'll get version 3.6.1. Before you get paranoid,
check the changelog
On 26/02/06, Erik Nørgaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Daniel A. wrote:
So, basically, if I want the newest version of OpenSSH running on my
system, I have to not use the one shipped with 6.0-RELEASE, and
install OpenSSH from ports?
Please don't toppost.
Installing from ports you'll get
Hi, quick question.
How do I update the OpenSSH which ships with FreeBSD6.0-RELEASE by default?
It's just that I dont feel secure running an old version (4.2p1) of
OpenSSH when there is a newer (4.3) version available.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
fixes, you have to update the base system to at least
one of the security branches or 6-STABLE.
The differences of /usr/src/UPDATING between RELENG_6_0_0_RELEASE (which
marks the 6.0-RELEASE in CVS) and the RELENG_6_0 branch are currently:
# Index: UPDATING
branches or 6-STABLE.
The differences of /usr/src/UPDATING between RELENG_6_0_0_RELEASE (which
marks the 6.0-RELEASE in CVS) and the RELENG_6_0 branch are currently:
# Index: UPDATING
# ===
# RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/UPDATING,v
On 2006-02-26 03:32, Daniel A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, basically, if I want the newest version of OpenSSH running on my
system, I have to not use the one shipped with 6.0-RELEASE, and
install OpenSSH from ports?
Maybe.
But do you *want* the latest version?
If the base-system version is
I just installed a server with FreeBSD 6.0. Everything went perfect.
Got it up and running and wanted to download the newest source prior to
installing a lot of ports and software. Used cvsup with stable-supfile.
Went throught the normal update procedure and when it was done it says
that I am
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 03:15:11PM -0600, Cody Holland wrote:
I just installed a server with FreeBSD 6.0. Everything went perfect.
Got it up and running and wanted to download the newest source prior to
installing a lot of ports and software. Used cvsup with stable-supfile.
Went throught the
On 2/22/06, Cody Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
. . . running FreeBSD 6.1-PRERELEASE #0.
. . . RELENG_6 tag,
Is a prerelease considered stable, or am I doing something wrong?
Naming conventions. Nothing else. For the brief life
of a -PRERELEASE, that's what -STABLE is. There's
also a
The difference between RELENG_6 and RELENG_6_[0-1] is one is a development
branch which releases are based off and RELENG_6_0 is the stable version
of the released code which only gets security fixes commited to it. As
bother are considred stable code compared to current STABLE sometimes
breaks
I have not been able to update from version 'php5-mysql-5.1.1' to
'php5-mysql-5.1.2_1'. I continually receive an error message.
I have created a log of the actual build available here:
http://www.seibercom.net/log/php5-mysql-build
The listing of /var/db/pkg: http://www.seibercom.net/log/files
501 - 600 of 1036 matches
Mail list logo
