From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 13 02:27:32 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 4C55516A4CE for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:27:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from gromit.dlib.vt.edu (gromit.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.29]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35E743D46 for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:27:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: from zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org (pool-151-199-90-129.roa.east.verizon.net [151.199.90.129]) by gromit.dlib.vt.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBD2RTQN026159 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:27:30 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: from zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org (localhost.Chelsea-Ct.Org [127.0.0.1]) by zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBD2RNBk003664 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:27:24 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: (from paul@localhost) by zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iBD2RN7K003663; Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:27:23 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) X-Authentication-Warning: zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org: paul set sender to paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu using -f From: Paul Mather To: Brett Glass In-Reply-To: <6.2.0.14.2.20041212161313.05f38da0@localhost> References: <20041212120049.9ABA516A583@hub.freebsd.org> <1102874180.8276.26.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org> <6.2.0.14.2.20041212161313.05f38da0@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:27:21 -0500 Message-Id: <1102904841.617.20.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.3 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 02:27:32 -0000 On Sun, 2004-12-12 at 16:14 -0700, Brett Glass wrote: > At 10:56 AM 12/12/2004, Paul Mather wrote: > > >On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 18:54:18 -0700, Brett Glass > >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). That would be okay for ports you explicitly installed, but not, I think, for ones that were installed as dependencies that you nevertheless wish to keep (i.e., that you would have explicitly installed, too, but couldn't because they were already installed). So, there still needs to be some way of arbitrating what you want to retain, akin to /usr/local/etc/pkg_leaves.exclude, or similar. As for resolving circular dependencies, I can't think of a legitimate case where they would arise. They can't, by definition: the ports dependencies form a directed acyclic graph (DAG), right? Cheers, Paul. -- e-mail: paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring production deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." --- Frank Vincent Zappa