Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 09:09:55 -0800 From: "Eugene M. Kim" <blue@white.lv> To: Marek Denis <marek@core.1lo.lublin.pl> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portupgrade and dependencies Message-ID: <45818563.9050508@white.lv> In-Reply-To: <20061212232850.GA58576@core.1lo.lublin.pl> References: <20061212164853.GA56552@core.1lo.lublin.pl> <F91C50B46A9E4D48A0886636DF2885D74FA44D@NJEXMB02.efi.internal> <20061212232850.GA58576@core.1lo.lublin.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Unfortunately, the semantics of -r and -R options of pkg_info is the opposite of the semantics used by pkgtools (such as portupgrade/portinstall, pkg_glob and so on). Eugene Marek Denis wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2006 at 05:55:40PM -0500, Dino Michailidis wrote: > >> portupgrade -r will also upgrade packages that depend on the port you are >> upgrading. It seems that this is not what you want. >> >> portupgrade -R will also upgrade packages required by the port you are >> upgrading - I believe this *is* what you want. >> >> > > Well, I don't get it. > When I type: > > pkg_info -R libiconv-1.9.2_1 > > it shows many of the packages (ettercap too) > so it is required by ettercap to work properly, yes? > And when I type > pkg_info -r ettercap > > it shows libiconv as a dependant, it mean a package which is required to > work ettercap properly, yes? > And that I have always thought -r option with portupgrade was all right > for me. >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45818563.9050508>