Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 11:26:22 -0500 From: Vivek Khera <khera@kciLink.com> To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Ports, shared libraries, dependencies and versions Message-ID: <14931.21166.414543.127487@onceler.kciLink.com> In-Reply-To: <000701c0753c$fd782190$0e1a24cb@scorpio> References: <002501c0752a$ef9b1c10$0e1a24cb@scorpio> <20010102214719.A84037@external.org> <000701c0753c$fd782190$0e1a24cb@scorpio>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> "RB" == Richard Browne <richb@pobox.com.au> writes: >> Your pkg_delete will complain (you may have to force it), but you >> can ignore the warnings. RB> If I have to force it and ignore warnings.. isn't that a blow to user RB> friendliness? Granted, the main thing is that it can hold together and RB> handle updates, but it's not clear to a new user. How do I know if it's RB> valid to use pkg_delete and ignore warnings? If you force the delete, then you lose the list of packages that depend on it, and then a major aspect of having /var/db/pkg is kind of lost. The way I tend to upgrade deeply required packages is this: mv /var/db/pkg/foo/+REQUIRED_BY /tmp pkg_delete foo install foo-1 mv /tmp/+REQUIRED_BY /var/db/pkg/foo-1/ cd /var/db/pkg perl -pi~ -e 's/pkgdep foo/pkgdep foo-1/' `grep -l foo */+CONTENTS` then check that +CONTENTS looks ok for those packages in +REQUIRED_BY That last bit updates the return link as noted in +REQUIRED_BY. Of course, you have to be sure that the shared libs and such are binary compatible across the version update. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Vivek Khera, Ph.D. Khera Communications, Inc. Internet: khera@kciLink.com Rockville, MD +1-240-453-8497 AIM: vivekkhera Y!: vivek_khera http://www.khera.org/~vivek/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14931.21166.414543.127487>