FreeBSD Port: amule-10275

Paolo Bormida pbormida at
Wed Sep 22 13:02:49 UTC 2010

Nice to know that amule will get more frequent updates, and the new knobs
are great as well, but isn't risky to use snapshots for a port? Are there
any policies about what to base a port upon?

And yes, you are correct about the availability of the sparc64 packages.

Can the new knobs be used to do a gui-less build of amule?



2010/9/22 Anonymous <swell.k at>

> Paolo Bormida <pbormida at> writes:
> > Does amule2 port switched from a stable 2.2.5 release to a daily
> > snapshot?
> Yes, snapshots are gonna be used unless there are more frequent releases
> upstream. You can find the history of changes on freshports.
> The package name also switched from `aMule' to `amule' in order to
> remove silly vendor capitalization and match port *directory* name.
> Besides, I plan to rename the port to plain `amule' with the next update
> in order to remove last bit of confusion, i.e. `2' version suffix in
> port directory name and in LATEST_LINK.
> > Does the sparc64 port still has the daily snapshot instead of the more
> > up-to-date 2.2.6_4 available?
> aMule-10266.tbz and amule-10275.tbz are newer than aMule-2.2.6_4.tbz
> unless I'm missing smth.
>  $ pkg_version
>  aMule                               <
>  $ portmaster -L
>  ===>>> aMule-2.2.6_4
>          ===>>> New version available: amule-10275
> I can only find aMule-10266.tbz for sparc64 for 8-stable, though.

   Paolo Bormida
  Giaveno - Torino

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list