Erwin Lansing wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 06:47:41PM +0200, Alex Dupre wrote: >> [LoN]Kamikaze wrote: >>> It still seems not to be fixed and I cannot find the PR either. Can you >>> give me >>> the number? >> I didn't open a PR, I contacted directly who proposed/committed that >> change and portmgr. But after a couple of mail exchanges nobody took a >> final decision (i.e. I'm still waiting a reply or an action). >> > As I described earlier, SUP_UPDATE, CVS_UPDATE and PORTSNAP_UPDATE are > mutually exclusive and cannot be used at the same time. That it worked > before was an artifact which has been fixed. That is doesn't work > anymore means the designed behaviour finally has been fixed and not > broken :-)
So you cannot maintain /usr/src if you wish to use portsnap for /usr/ports? The intended behaviour is stupid. I would prefer a fall back to portsnap if PORTSSUPFILE is not provided. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
