On Sunday 01 July 2007 17:19:22 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 29/06/07, Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems like a lot of people keep their ports regularly up to date by
> > just running portupgrade -a. I've seen it onlin
On 29/06/07, Michael P. Soulier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
It seems like a lot of people keep their ports regularly up to date by just
running portupgrade -a. I've seen it online, and in books.
As /usr/ports/UPDATING is rather large, it seems impossible to look for
potential
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:14:52 -0400
"Michael P. Soulier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It seems like a lot of people keep their ports regularly up to date by just
> running portupgrade -a. I've seen it online, and in books.
I've been updati
Michael P. Soulier wrote:
Hi,
It seems like a lot of people keep their ports regularly up to date by just
running portupgrade -a. I've seen it online, and in books.
As /usr/ports/UPDATING is rather large, it seems impossible to look for
potential issues with every package that you
At 07:14 PM 6/29/2007, you wrote:
So, is running portupgrade -a a good idea, as you likely haven't
checked for issues
for your system?
I just started using portupgrade recently, and no, I would NOT let it
rip with the --all option.
I find it's most useful for the libraries an
Michael P. Soulier writes:
> As /usr/ports/UPDATING is rather large, it seems impossible to
> look for potential issues with every package that you're going to
> upgrade. So, is running portupgrade -a a good idea, as you likely
> haven't checked for issues for your sys
ly up to date by just
>
>
> running portupgrade -a. I&#
Hi,
It seems like a lot of people keep their ports regularly up to date by just
running portupgrade -a. I've seen it online, and in books.
As /usr/ports/UPDATING is rather large, it seems impossible to look for
potential issues with every package that you're going to upgrade. So,
