Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 20:22:11 +0400 From: Alexander Churanov <alexanderchuranov@gmail.com> To: jhell <jhell@dataix.net> Cc: Ade Lovett <ade@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Users and groups kept after a port deinstallation Message-ID: <AANLkTik-rY3D_2R2XxLbdo34weffGZzXpTUUD6VeLK5f@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005231215550.85568@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny> References: <AANLkTindTvyrfPRj_cGWUC3LXWI63bGN5azaXo_xYRVu@mail.gmail.com> <4BF7C6EE.3010001@dataix.net> <20100522134212.3d5447a8@gumby.homeunix.com> <4BF7FB7D.1010501@dataix.net> <20100522235425.1ab2c504@gumby.homeunix.com> <86aarr8q0m.fsf@gmail.com> <A8D32BA4-70D5-48DC-B992-8B093BD97774@FreeBSD.org> <4BF8A565.7040309@dataix.net> <4BF8C4F8.9090103@infracaninophile.co.uk> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005231215550.85568@pragry.qngnvk.ybpny>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/5/23 jhell <jhell@dataix.net>: > That shouldn't actually be to hard. If a utility like the three main upgrade > tools that are being used the most right now would export a variable for say > "UPGRADING=yes" then the uninstall script could check against that to decide > whether or not the port is being removed or upgraded and make the proper > decision while alerting the admin to whats going on. Folks, May be is' better to add another make target, called "update", which would invoke "deinstall", followed by "reinstall"? This would encapsulate the mechanism inside port.mk. Alexander Churanov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTik-rY3D_2R2XxLbdo34weffGZzXpTUUD6VeLK5f>