From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 29 19:35:17 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933CB10656B0; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:35:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mel.flynn+fbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net) Received: from mailhub.rachie.is-a-geek.net (rachie.is-a-geek.net [66.230.99.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CB118FC25; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:35:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mel.flynn+fbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net) Received: from smoochies.rachie.is-a-geek.net (mailhub.lan.rachie.is-a-geek.net [192.168.2.11]) by mailhub.rachie.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D63577E826; Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:35:16 -0800 (AKDT) From: Mel Flynn To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 11:35:16 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.11.4 (FreeBSD/8.0-BETA2; KDE/4.2.4; i386; ; ) References: <1248027417.14210.110.camel@neo.cse.buffalo.edu> <20090729170601.GA2841@tafi.alm.flutnet.org> <4A709981.80600@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4A709981.80600@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200907291135.16470.mel.flynn+fbsd.current@mailing.thruhere.net> Cc: Doug Barton , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portmaster -R (Was: Re: HEADS-UP: Shared Library Versions bumped...) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 19:35:18 -0000 On Wednesday 29 July 2009 10:48:33 Doug Barton wrote: > Alson van der Meulen wrote: > > * Doug Barton [2009-07-29 18:13]: > >> Mel Flynn wrote: > >>> Gotcha. Is there a reason the flags are removed if the options are not > >>> "-r or -f"? > >> > >> Yes, so we don't have stale flags sitting around forever to confuse > >> future runs. > > > > I have been bitten by this in the past. A run of portmaster -r > > some-lib-that-half-of-my-ports-depend-on aborted because of a shared > > library error in a dependency which was not recompiled before the > > dependent port. I recompiled the dependency with a manual portmaster > > $portname, after this portmaster -r had to start all over. I didn't > > expect portmaster to clear the PM_DONE flags during non-resumable > > operations like rebuilding a single port (and the manpage contains very > > little information about -R). My workaround is to use portupgrade for > > these manual fixes. > > Yes, I've been considering that exact scenario since atm I'm > rebuilding all my ports with -afR. > > How about this? When the user has -[rf] but not -R, and there are flag > files present, ask if they should be cleared before beginning to do > anything. Otherwise (no -[rf]) ignore them. Sound good? That's definitely "what you would expect it to do". -- Mel