Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 13:24:38 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Andreas Klemm <akl@klemm.apsfilter.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG, Akinori MUSHA <knu@iDaemons.org> Subject: Re: another portupgrade woe ... Message-ID: <20021023202438.GC21755@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20021023085842.GB98983@titan.klemm.apsfilter.org> References: <20021023085842.GB98983@titan.klemm.apsfilter.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Izn7cH1Com+I3R9J Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 10:58:42AM +0200, Andreas Klemm wrote: > Are the portupgrade tools somewhat inconsistent ??? No, the ports collection always did this, until it was recently fixed. The old behaviour was the following: if you have an version X of a dependency installed, and the ports collection contains version Y, where X < Y, then installing a port that depends on this port will register a dependency on version Y instead of version X that you actually have. This is the wrong behaviour and portupgrade will complain about it. This was recently fixed..update to -stable and update your ports collection. Kris --Izn7cH1Com+I3R9J Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9twWGWry0BWjoQKURAmiWAJ9bbxYD5QmzDlPs8rx0zljrHAhlxQCfZvrB HDmpraPM+MbGcZun9SAkYm8= =0rKx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Izn7cH1Com+I3R9J-- 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?20021023202438.GC21755>