Re: packaging system (was: Re: GCC 3.3.2 kernel)

[Christopher Vance <vance@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 03:19:37PM +0100, Emiel Kollof wrote:
> that I want to see portupgrade go away. Although it serves a need, it's
> a need that needs to be serviced by the packaging system. And the
> packaging system should be able to do a better job than portupgrade does
> now. 

Indeed.  I use portupgrade on FreeBSD, and it seems to "work", but it
rankles that you need to install ruby.  (Sort of like cvsup and
Modula-3, I guess.)

Does portupgrade do all its work in dependency order, so that if A
depends on B then B is updated before A?  I don't believe it does, but
could be convinced otherwise.

--
Christopher Vance