portsdb and ruby bug on 4-STABLE

Chris racerx at makeworld.com
Wed Sep 8 20:29:23 PDT 2004

Garance A Drosihn wrote:
> At 9:22 AM +1000 9/9/04, Rob B wrote:
>>> This way, all of the package tools will always see the replacement
>>> driver, regardless of the state of the environment when you run
>>> them :)
>> For the record - Alpha arch does not exhibit this problem.  This
>> is on both 5.3-BETA and 4.10-STABLE
> It is almost certainly a matter of luck.  With some INDEX's,
> i386 will see the problem and alpha won't.  On other INDEX's,
> you'll be the one having trouble and no one on i386 will see
> the problem.  It's not like the bugs magically disappear on
> alpha.  They just show up in different situations.

It's pretty simple everyone - there IS an issue. One only needs to 
search both here, and the Questions list.

There is more then one way around this. One way that seems to be missed 
is using portindex/portindexdb.

I think presenting as many "fixes" as possible gives the end user the 
choice that he/she is more "comfy" doing.

Is there a "more correct" way over the others? I don't know. That's 
something the maintainers ought to come up with.

Let's not avoid other possible answer for the simple fact of "well, I'll 
have to install additional software".

We'll come up with ways, let's let the coders decide the "best practice".

Best regards,

Working capital doesn't.

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list