From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Dec 12 23:14:44 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 E5F6916A4CE
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:14:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from lariat.org (lariat.org [63.229.157.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75C1443D53
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:14:44 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from brett@lariat.org)
Received: from runaround.lariat.org (IDENT:ppp1000.lariat.org@lariat.org
	[63.229.157.2])	by lariat.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA12653;
	Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:14:21 -0700 (MST)
X-message-flag: Warning! Use of Microsoft Outlook renders your system
	susceptible to Internet worms.
Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20041212161313.05f38da0@localhost>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:14:20 -0700
To: Paul Mather <paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu>,
	freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
In-Reply-To: <1102874180.8276.26.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org>
References: <20041212120049.9ABA516A583@hub.freebsd.org>
 <1102874180.8276.26.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Subject: Re: Un-GNOME-ing a FreeBSD box
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>,
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:14:45 -0000

At 10:56 AM 12/12/2004, Paul Mather wrote:
  
>On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:54:18 -0700, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
>wrote:
>
>> Again, I really find it hard to believe that there would be no
>> provision 
>> for deleting a port AND the ports on which it depends cleanly. I tend
>> to use a minimal number of ports and packages, and so didn't realize
>> that this was such a difficult thing until now.
>
>The problem with deleting a port and the ports on which it depends
>cleanly is that there may be other ports depending on a dependency.  So,
>there needs to be some arbitration to decide what legitimately should go
>and which should stay.

What's needed is a way of doing "garbage collection" -- reference counts
plus a way of resolving circular dependencies (which reference counts
can't handle).

--Brett