From owner-freebsd-questions Wed Dec 11 20: 7:53 2002 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 D888C37B401 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:07:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from rutger.owt.com (rutger.owt.com [204.118.6.16]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33DC243E4A for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:07:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kstewart@owt.com) Received: from owt-207-41-94-233.owt.com (owt-207-41-94-233.owt.com [207.41.94.233]) by rutger.owt.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA28526; Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:07:46 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Kent Stewart To: John Bleichert , Darren Shepard Subject: Re: port upgrade method question Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 20:07:45 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.3 Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200212112007.45850.kstewart@owt.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wednesday 11 December 2002 07:22 pm, John Bleichert wrote: > On Wed, 11 Dec 2002, Darren Shepard wrote: > > Subject: Re: port upgrade method question > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2002 at 09:07:40AM -0500, > > > > John Bleichert writes: > > | I've CVSup'd my system and my ports tree (ports-all). Now I'm > > | using > > | > > | # pkg_version -v > > | > > | to see which installed ports have an upgrade available. Working > > | with this info, I go into each port I wish to upgrade and > > | > > | # portupgrade -R port-name > > | > > | I can't do a > > | > > | # portupgrade -aR > > | > > | as I can't leave Thinkpad up and running in one place long > > | enough to build all of them. > > | > > | I'm iteratively using the steps above to upgrade my ports tree. > > | Is there a better/different way? Am I skipping any steps? Since > > | I'm upgrading one port at a time, do I need to run portsdb? > > | Also, I see references in the archives to > > > > FWIW, I do something like the following: > > > > 1. `portversion -l '<' -c > /tmp/portup.sh' > > 2. edit /tmp/portup.sh to taste > > 3. `/bin/sh /tmp/portup.sh' > > Thanks for the pointer. I was fiddling with this tactic on my > workstation at home which has a great deal more ports installed > than my laptop. > > > | # cd /usr/ports > > | # make index > > | > > | Do I need to do this? Everything seems to be working well, I'm > > | just wondering if my method is proper. > > | > > | Thanks - JB > > > > I think portsdb(1) answers your INDEX questions: > > > > Yes, it does. Thanks. I'm slowly putting all the pieces of staying > current with a large ports tree together. For now, I'm dealing with > past mistakes and their results, such as this: > > root:~ > pkg_info | grep qt > qt-3.0.5_3 A C++ X GUI toolkit > qt-3.0.5_5 A C++ X GUI toolkit > root:~ > pkg_info -R qt-3.0.5_3 > Information for qt-3.0.5_3: > > Required by: > kdebase-3.0.5 > kdelibs-3.0.5_1 > > > root:~ > pkg_info -R qt-3.0.5_5 > Information for qt-3.0.5_5: > > Required by: > arts-1.0.4,1 > kdebase-3.0.5 > kdegames-3.0.4 > kdegraphics-3.0.4 > kdelibs-3.0.5_1 > kdemultimedia-3.0.4 > kdeutils-3.0.4_1 > koffice-1.2,1 > kstars-0.9 > > Odd that kdebase and kdelibs require qt-3.0.5_3 *and* qt-3.0.5_5. I > wonder if this is a result of me climbing the learning curve, or an > anomaly in the kde dependencies? Does this discussion belong on > freebsd-ports? Doesn't seem like it. There isn't anything broken with that port, so it doesn't belong on=20 -ports. It is a user port installation question and belongs on=20 -questions.=20 You have somehow installed both of them. You need to have portupgrade=20 installed and then run "pkgdb -F" and let it delete the old=20 dependancy and keep the files. Portupgrade requires a current INDEX.=20 If you have cvsuped ports-all and didn't upgrade your INDEXs, you=20 will need to=20 cd /usr/ports make index portsdb -u=20 or=20 portsdb -uU Right now "-U" produces a large number of messages and creates an=20 INDEX that is 8 ports smaller than the INDEX generated by "make=20 index". Kent Kent > > Thanks for the pointers! > > JB > > # John Bleichert > # http://vonbek.dhs.org/latest.jpg > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message --=20 Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message