From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 15 00:50:31 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01A9116A41F for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:50:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mail2.fluidhosting.com [204.14.90.12]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 29A1543D48 for ; Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:50:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 50233 invoked by uid 399); 15 Jan 2006 00:50:26 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Jan 2006 00:50:26 -0000 Message-ID: <43C99C50.6060608@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 16:50:24 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://www.FreeBSD.org/ User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20060112) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexander Leidinger References: <43BCF31F.8050900@FreeBSD.org> <1136501778.40648.17.camel@localhost> <43C38A38.1020408@FreeBSD.org> <1136893017.2410.9.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <43C8E446.5010603@FreeBSD.org> <20060114144016.1dc9fdd0@Magellan.Leidinger.net> <43C97BEB.3030601@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <43C97BEB.3030601@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: pav@freebsd.org, freebsd ports Subject: Re: New /bin/sh based script to manage ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:50:31 -0000 Doug Barton wrote: > the more I think about it the more I > think it makes sense to do it in this order for the 'update all' case: > > 1. ports that have no dependencies (roots) > 2. ports that have dependencies, and are depended on (branches?) > 3. ports that have dependencies, and are not depended on (leaves) Turns out I was missing one category. After roots there needs to be a category for ports that have no dependencies themselves, but are depended on. I am calling them 'trunks' to torture the tree analogy even further. :) I just uploaded a new version of portmaster that has this implemented for the "update all" case. Thanks again for this suggestion, I think it's a good one. BTW, where the typical case of updating or installing a single port is concerned, going from the top down is the right thing to do, since dependencies will vary depending on OPTIONS chosen. However, for the case of updating all the ports that are already installed, your suggestion is a welcome optimization. Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection