From owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 4 08:17:32 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A47734 for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:17:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rfg@tristatelogic.com) Received: from outgoing.tristatelogic.com (segfault.tristatelogic.com [69.62.255.118]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 890B52D6A for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 08:17:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from segfault-nmh-helo.tristatelogic.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by segfault.tristatelogic.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F11873B10C for ; Fri, 4 Oct 2013 01:17:31 -0700 (PDT) From: "Ronald F. Guilmette" To: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org Subject: fixing port dependencies Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 01:17:31 -0700 Message-ID: <99496.1380874651@server1.tristatelogic.com> X-BeenThere: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Ruby discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2013 08:17:32 -0000 So, um, I just tried to update a bunch of my ports to the latest revs, which I do rather infrequently, and of course, as usual, I got a boat load of port build failures. (Sigh.) Well, anyway, one of them was this: - lang/ruby18 (marked as IGNORE) I don't use Ruby myself, so obviously, some other port(s) I have installed are using it. I've gone ahead and built & installed lang/ruby20 and that went fine. Now I'd just like to know what, if anything, I should do, specifically, in order to make every installed port that I have that was dependent upon ruby18 now instead dependent upon ruby20. And actually, since we are on the subject, is doing that exact thing even wise? I have no idea, but wish I knew. Is it possible that some port or another that I have installed that was dependent upon ruby18 might now malfunction if forced to use ruby20 instead? (That notion certainly does not seem to be entirely out of the question.)