On 6 March 2012 20:38, wrote:
> Peter Maloney wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM, deeptech71 at gmail.com
>> wrote:
>> > X11R6 should be a symlink to local or ./local.
>>
>> Did you test this, by removing the link and creating it
>> relative to see if there are any stupid side effects?
>
Peter Maloney wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM, deeptech71 at gmail.com
> wrote:
> > X11R6 should be a symlink to local or ./local.
>
> Did you test this, by removing the link and creating it
> relative to see if there are any stupid side effects?
No apparent side effects. And I can't e
On 02/24/2012 01:16 AM, deeptec...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM, deeptec...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> X11R6 is actually a symlink to /usr/local, and not usr/local or
>> .usr/local! Also, /home is a symlink to /usr/home, and not usr/home or
>> ./usr/home
> I meant to say that X11
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 11:41 PM, deeptec...@gmail.com
wrote:
> X11R6 is actually a symlink to /usr/local, and not usr/local or
> .usr/local! Also, /home is a symlink to /usr/home, and not usr/home or
> ./usr/home
I meant to say that X11R6 should be a symlink to local or ./local.
About /home: I'v
Well, I did not actually get a full membership to the "rm -rf /"
fanclub, but I managed to remove all installed ports, basically
requiring a full reinstall. Here's how it happened:
Once upon a time, I did a full reinstall (not because of "rm -rf
/"-like things). I kept th
