Hi
I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
--
/km
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing l
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Kalle Møller
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
> two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
> learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
>
> --
> /km
I'm sure they're bo
Kalle Møller wrote:
Hi
I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
Freedom of choice. That choice is up to you. Whichever you you feel
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Kalle Møller <
freebsd-questi...@k-moeller.dk> wrote:
> Hi
>
> I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
> two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
> learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
Kalle Møller wrote:
Hi
I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
There is not necessarily a correct answer, either is "correct". Howev
On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Adam Vandemore wrote:
freebsd-update is another matter though. Base system security
updates are distributed via that channel(binary updates) so it's a
good idea to run that regularly.
I just noticed the description in the man page for freebsd-update:
..."Note
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Charles Howse wrote:
On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Adam Vandemore wrote:
I just noticed the description in the man page for freebsd-update:
..."Note that updates are only available if they are being built for
the FreeBSD release and architecture being used; in particular,
Charles Howse wrote:
On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Adam Vandemore wrote:
freebsd-update is another matter though. Base system security
updates are distributed via that channel(binary updates) so it's a
good idea to run that regularly.
I just noticed the description in the man page for freeb
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:39:37 +0100, Kalle Møller wrote
> Hi
>
> I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
> two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm
> going to learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
>
> --
> /km
> _
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:50:48 -0400 (EDT), Chris Hill wrote
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009, Charles Howse wrote:
>
> > On Mar 19, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Adam Vandemore wrote:
> >
> > I just noticed the description in the man page for freebsd-update:
> >
> > ..."Note that updates are only available if they are be
On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:06:31 -0500
Paul Procacci wrote:
> Freedom of choice. That choice is up to you. Whichever you you feel
> most comfortable with...that's the one you should use. Personally, I
> use both.
Just don't swap back and forth on the same ports tree. If you switch
from csup to p
At 7:39 PM +0100 3/19/09, Kalle Møller wrote:
Hi
I've been digging around, but I can't find a clear answer, which of those
two is the "correct" to use. Hence I don't use one now, so if I'm going to
learn one, I would prefer it to be the right one.
That's a reasonable question to ask. Unfortun
> From: f...@brightstar.bomgardner.net
> To: ch...@monochrome.org; cho...@charter.net
> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:45:11 -0600
> CC: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: Portsnap vs CSup
>
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:50:48 -0400 (EDT), Chris Hill wrote
> > O
compiling the kernel on that could take several days by itself let alone
compiling X and then a thick GUI like KDE or GNOME. amazing that a 100MHz
system with 48 megs of ram can still run so fast if you build it right.
for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on
i
> Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:48:26 +0100
> From: woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl
> To: millenia2...@hotmail.com
> CC: f...@bomgardner.net; ch...@monochrome.org; cho...@charter.net;
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: RE: Portsnap vs CSup
>
> >
> > compil
> >
> for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on
> it works FAST on 100Mhz machine with 48MB RAM.
>
> Yes compiling is slow, but normal usage is FAST.
I never used gnome or KDE on it, ran Blackbox insted.
of course it's fast.
and even slower machines like 486/33 w
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:12:12 -0400, Sean Cavanaugh
wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:48:26 +0100
> > for sure not KDE, but X and FreeBSD itself with good software running on
> > it works FAST on 100Mhz machine with 48MB RAM.
> >
> > Yes compiling is slow, but normal usage is FAST.
>
>
> I
17 matches
Mail list logo
