From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 19 16:40:46 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 5CB3D16A4CE for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:40:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from pd2mo3so.prod.shaw.ca (shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2546343D1F for ; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:40:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from flowers@users.sourceforge.net) Received: from pd2mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (pd2mr6so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.9]) by l-daemon (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.18 (built Jul 28 2003)) with ESMTP id <0HUU00FKPMXS1T@l-daemon> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:34:40 -0700 (MST) Received: from pn2ml7so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.151]) by pd2mr6so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 Patch 1 (built Jan 13 2004)) with ESMTP id <0HUU00A9EMY10B40@pd2mr6so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:34:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from sirius (h68-144-47-89.cg.shawcable.net [68.144.47.89]) 2003))freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:34:41 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 17:34:38 -0700 From: Dan MacMillan To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Subject: Impact of running pkgdb -fu 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: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 00:40:46 -0000 Hi, I have a question about the effect of running "pkgdb -fu", besides making me laugh because of its whimsically profane command-line options. Suppose I have been running "pkgdb -F" as suggested by portupgrade, and I accidentally delete a stale dependency that should have been handled in another way. Will rebuilding the package database with "pkgdb -fu" restore this dependency to its pristine, correct state? On a related note ... I recently ran "portupgrade -rRa", as is my wont, and it suggested I run "pkgdb -F". So I did. It reported as stale dependencies packages that were never installed on my system. Is this normal? I haven't seen it before. For example it reported as a stale dependency of one of the kde* packages the x11/nvidia driver. Although I have that driver installed, I downloaded and installed it by hand from the nVidia web site (I didn't know it was available as a port). Hence my question. I accidentally said, "remove this dependency" to "pkgdb -F". After realizing that the dependencies "pkgdb -F" was reporting as stale were actually not installed, I built each of those ports which made "pkgdb -F" stop complaining about them. I also subsequently built the x11/nvidia port, but it's the removal of that first dependency that's keeping me up at night. Hence my question regarding "pkgdb -fu". Does it restore everything to its neat-and-tidy state? Or am I cursed to live out my days with a besmirched (or befouled, your choice) package database? -Dan MacMillan