From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 2 08:41:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C09D416A4CE; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:41:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cyclone.emea.mci.com (cyclone.wcom.co.uk [193.131.254.139]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D086A43D3F; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 08:41:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from philip.payne@uk.mci.com) Received: from borg.emea.mci.com ([166.59.191.249] helo=ocampa.emea.mci.com) by cyclone.emea.mci.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C2n9j-0001iH-V6; Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:41:20 +0000 Received: from gblon1exch06.uk.mcilink.com ([170.127.79.25]) by ocampa.emea.mci.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C2n9j-0004Gl-3o; Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:41:19 +0000 Received: by gblon1exch06.uk.mcilink.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:45:28 +0100 Message-ID: From: Philip Payne To: Mark Ovens , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:45:25 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" X-MCI-EMEA-Spam-Score: -98.5 (---------------------------------------------------) X-MCI-EMEA-Signature: 350fba9f7da07a68f9a94742d2addcc1 Subject: RE: Package version problem with portupgrade(1) X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:41:22 -0000 > > Well, png is up to png-1.2.5_8 and if you did a recent cvsup and > > recreated your INDEXs, that is what you should be seeing. > > OK, portupgrade(1) _is_ looking for 1.2.5_8 but it is trying to get it > from > ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-4.9-release/All > where the version of png is 1.2.5_2, so how to resolve the conflict? > Seems to me that portupgrade(1) needs to be getting the packages from > packages-4-stable/All instead? > > > Staying behind is a good way to end up with a security > black hole :). > > Precisely. > > > A cvsup of ports-all and a portsdb -uU should be a good way to keep > > your system current. > > > > Will that change where portupgrade(1) tries to get the packages from? I believe the package updates will lag behind the ports source update i.e. if you use portupgrade -PP and use packages only there will be the occasional port that does not have a package available. I'm not sure how long the lag is... I guess different for different ports. I think you'll just have to accept a slight lag on when you can update certain ports. If this is not the real error I'm sure someone will correct me. Thanks, Phil.