From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 11 22:36:02 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 3DD3616A4CE for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:36:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com (out2.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F5A43D2D for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:36:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from frontend2.messagingengine.com (frontend2.internal [10.202.2.151]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C69EC40D01 for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:36:00 -0500 (EST) X-Sasl-enc: 7JfCEHcSVaNH3Iq6t8l3XA 1102804558 Received: from gumby.localhost (dsl-80-41-36-57.access.uk.tiscali.com [80.41.36.57]) by frontend2.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B06CE56FABA for ; Sat, 11 Dec 2004 17:35:58 -0500 (EST) From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:35:52 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.7.1 References: <20041211103936.57e5b030@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20041211103936.57e5b030@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200412112235.52792.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Subject: Re: when to use 'Portupgrade -R' 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, 11 Dec 2004 22:36:02 -0000 On Saturday 11 December 2004 20:39, Robert Marella wrote: > On Friday 10 December 2004 14:54, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > > I've run into some problems using 'portupgrade -R' so I'm wondering if > > just using 'portupgrade' is good enough in most cases. I don't want a > > port to be upgraded without NECESSARY dependencies, but I don't want > > minor upgrades done UNNECESSARILY that might cause inconsistencies in the > > database. > > Hi Jonathon > > I am using Gnome 2.8 nad for what it is worth, here is how I do it. > > cvsup all ports > pkgdb -F > > #portversion -l "<" > upgrading > #vi upgrading > using edit tools I remove all "tabs '<' and 'cr'" > I am fairly proficient with vi and can do this quickly (using the "D" > "J"). I am sure the "script gurus" can do this in one fell swoop > but I am a newbie. > I also insert "portupgrade" in front of the list of ports. > #sh upgrading > go get a beer! > usually I try to do this once a week and there are from 10 to 20 ports that > need updating. sometimnes I have to repeat the "go get a beer" step. > > If we are to trust "portversion" then I don't think the -r or -R switch > would be needed. Feedback from more knowledgeable members is welcome. > This is just equivalent to running portupgrade -a It will upgrade more ports than portupgrade -R As far as Gnome is concerned, the best thing to do is follow the instructions give here