Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 14:37:51 -0600 From: "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1014410272.750ac9@mired.org> To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Best way to upgrade all installed ports? Message-ID: <15472.5279.611970.984440@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <200202171728.g1HHSQJ69338@bmah.dyndns.org> References: <20020217171134.13037.qmail@www.smluc.org> <200202171728.g1HHSQJ69338@bmah.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bruce A. Mah <bmah@FreeBSD.ORG> types: > > > Probably involves portugrade, but I'm not certain how to use it > > > for this? > > pkg_version -c > update > > vi update > > (tweak to desire) > > sh update > Please don't do this, unless you're sure you can "tweak to desire" all > of the dependency information correctly. Nah, there's not a lot of danger in letting the dependencies rot. Every once and a while, you'll get into trouble, and have to clean it up. > PS. I'm the original author of pkg_version. I use portupgrade. I tried portupgrade, and found that I had to do more work every time I used it than I had to do in dealing with the occasional problems caused by dependency rot from pkg_version -c. For one thing, it doesn't handle packages that don't come from the ports tree gracefully. Given that I've always got at least one of those, and sometimes two or three, that's a pain. For another, it doesn't handle the case where a dependency is missing and I want it that way. This happens when an port A installs applications 1, 2, and 3, and I want to use applications 1 and 2 but don't care about 3. But 3 requires a library package B that's bigger than everything else installed to run A put together. Worse yet, having B installed means that other ports will by default build with code that depends on it, which means I have to have the daemon part of B running for them to operate properly, and I don't want to do *that*, either. The easy solution is to just delete B and forget about it. Except portupgrade won't let me. Portupgrades insistence that everything be nice and tidy means that every time I run portupgrade, I have to deal with all these issues. If things could be tagged as "broken but acceptable", I'd be a lot happier. Better yet, if it would do the reverse of what it does now, and when something was "broken but acceptable" and not actually broken, let me know about it, that would add utility to it. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15472.5279.611970.984440>