From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Nov 9 17:19:24 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13DEA106566B for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:19:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx23.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD45A8FC12 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 17:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 11315 invoked by uid 399); 9 Nov 2010 17:19:22 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO doug-optiplex.ka9q.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 9 Nov 2010 17:19:22 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4CD98299.9090809@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 09:19:21 -0800 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101028 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dmitry Pryanishnikov References: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports Subject: Re: Combining several upgrades using portmaster X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:19:24 -0000 On 11/09/2010 06:09, Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote: > Hello! > > I wonder whether it's possible to automatically combine several > upgrades using portmaster. Suppose one have to handle both > ports/UPDATING entries: > > 20100530: suggests portmaster -w -r gettext > > 20100328: suggests portmaster -r png- > > It would be nice to combine them as ' portmaster -w -r gettext -r > png-' to prevent double upgrade of relevant packages; however '-r' can > be specified only once according to manpage. I've handled this by > running both commands, replying 'n' to 'Proceed?' question, merging > resulting origin list with sort|uniq and feeding it back to > portmaster, but maybe there is a simpler way to solve the problem? The number of times that -r is actually required is (thankfully) quite small, and the number of times that there is a need to do 2 -r's of ports that are heavily depended on is very very small. In fact I can only remember a few such instances over 15+ years. OTOH, the code to handle the -r feature is unfortunately quite complex, and I'm a little hesitant to mess with it (to be honest, mostly because it's working right now, so I don't want to tempt fate). :) I will, however, add this idea to my big list o' portmaster ideas and see if it's something I could tackle at a future date. Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/