Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2004 02:44:14 -0600 From: Jay Moore <jaymo@cromagnon.cullmail.com> To: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: unintelligible questions from pkgdb -F [ part of 5.2 portupgrade hairball ] Message-ID: <200404070344.14871.jaymo@cromagnon.cullmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20040406093904.GD17361@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <200404052159.36889.jaymo@cromagnon.cullmail.com> <20040406093904.GD17361@happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 06 April 2004 04:39 am, Matthew Seaman wrote: > What this means is that the eel2-2.4.1 port claims to have a > dependency on the gtk-2.2.4_1 port, but no such port is installed -- > it's listed in the file: > > /var/db/pkg/eel2-2.4.1/+CONTENTS > > pkgdb(1) attempts to find an alternative port that will fulfill the > dependency, which it can edit into the +CONTENTS file. Unfortunately, > pkgdb is not any sort of AI program, so it prompts you with the > closest matching name out of all the ports you have installed. The > percentage figure it gives is a measure of how closely the port name > matches the desired name. Usually this works well, because it picks > up a slightly different version of the same port. Amazing! That makes sense... why, oh why isn't it in the man page for pkgdb? The rest of your response is most helpful also. I think rather than adding a bunch of clutter here I'll follow up on each of them separately. Thanks, Jay
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404070344.14871.jaymo>