From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 22 03:13:20 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 2E17B16A4CE for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 03:13:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from stjohn.stjohn.ac.th (stjohn.stjohn.ac.th [202.21.144.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64F1B43D53 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 03:13:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mcrogerm@stjohn.ac.th) Received: from tulip.stjohn.ac.th ([203.151.134.104]) by stjohn.stjohn.ac.th (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA13304 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:10:33 +0700 (ICT) Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.0.20040722083034.00a094a0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: stjohn.stjohn.ac.th:mcrogerm@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 10:12:30 +0700 To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG From: Roger Merritt Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Upgrades fail on Perl dependency 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, 22 Jul 2004 03:13:20 -0000 I keep having problems with various ports. It seems a lot of them are dependent on Perl 5.8.2 -- the dependency is specific, but I haven't been able to figure out where the '5.8.2' is being specified. Here's an example: ===> gtk-1.2.10_12 depends on file: /usr/local/bin/perl5.8.2 - not found ===> Verifying install for /usr/local/bin/perl5.8.2 in /usr/ports/lang/perl5.8 ===> Vulnerability check disabled ===> Extracting for perl-5.8.4 >> Checksum OK for perl-5.8.4.tar.bz2. >> Checksum OK for BSDPAN-5.8.4.tar.bz2. How can I change the dependency so portupgrade does *not* recompile perl every time? Portupgrade deletes the "old" executable, but when pkg_add finds the entry in the database it refuses to install the executable that has just been compiled. Or something like that. I have about a hundred ports that portupgrade -a just leaves because of this problem. -- Roger