From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 14 21:29:04 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 1F3C916A4CE for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:29:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cableone.net (scanmail2.cableone.net [24.116.0.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E39F943D64 for ; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:29:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kitbsdlists@HotPOP.com) Received: from vixen42. (unverified [24.119.123.61]) by smail2.cableone.net (SurgeMail 1.5d2) with ESMTP id 2625659 for multiple; Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:18:24 -0700 Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:26:32 -0500 From: Vulpes Velox To: "R. M. Los" Message-Id: <20040414212632.574d911f@vixen42.> In-Reply-To: <1082002191.626.9.camel@frog.boundariez.com> References: <1081986512.620.3.camel@frog.boundariez.com> <20040414210843.39a75358@vixen42.> <1082002191.626.9.camel@frog.boundariez.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.10claws (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Server: High Performance Mail Server - http://surgemail.com cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What happened after gnome upgrade?? 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, 15 Apr 2004 04:29:04 -0000 On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:09:52 -0400 "R. M. Los" wrote: > On Wed, 2004-04-14 at 22:08, Vulpes Velox wrote: > > > GTK+ was updated recently and this sounds like what happens when > > apps that use it get out of sync with it. You will have to > > recompile everything that uses GTK+. I suggest portupgraded. > > > > /me recently saw this himself with the gtk apps he uses when > > updated gtk+ > > So you're suggesting "portupgrade -irR gtk" ?? That sounds just as > logical as anything else, I guess.... is this your suggestion? Yeah, I used portupgrade -ai myself. AFAIK all effected ports had thier revision numbered bumped up.