From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 22 12:45:56 2009 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 93F16106566B for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:45:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bennett@cs.niu.edu) Received: from mp.cs.niu.edu (mp.cs.niu.edu [131.156.145.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DE738FC1A for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:45:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bennett@cs.niu.edu) Received: from mp.cs.niu.edu (bennett@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mp.cs.niu.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6MCjCFd028927; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:45:12 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:45:12 -0500 (CDT) From: Scott Bennett Message-Id: <200907221245.n6MCjCOU028926@mp.cs.niu.edu> To: freebsd-ports-local@be-well.ilk.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Cc: Subject: Re: needing install OpenOffice.org without messing up perl 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: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:45:56 -0000 Finally getting back to this...sigh... On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 14:10:54 -0400 Lowell Gilbert wrote: >Scott Bennett writes: > >> What is the best way to install OpenOffice.org from a package without >> the installation trying to reinstall perl5.8 over perl5.10? > >Get a package that includes them? Do you have any suggestions of where to find such a beast? > >Short of that, you would have to install the package without >dependencies. There is a pkg_add option to do this, but the Sure, but OOo is so huge and requires so much other stuff that there is almost certainly something it wants installed that I do not already have installed. >trick comes afterwards, when you have to fix it up to use the >perl you actually have (perl-after-upgrade(1) might be able to >handle this, but you have no guarantees.). Or you could just Why wouldn't OOo, once installed, simply use whatever were installed as /usr/local/bin/perl? It seems to me that the bigger worry it that portmaster may try to rebuild it whenever a -a option is used. portmanager, OTOH, has a -u option that might do the job. portupgrade, of course, can have all sorts of things blocked from upgrading by putting the proper magic into /etc/portupgrade.conf. If only portmaster had a similar way of doing things. Since so many people now advocate using either portmanager or portmaster to do general upgrades (-a), rather than portupgrade -a, I guess portmanager is the only method available to keep OOo from being rebuilt whenever one of its dependencies gets upgraded. >install both perl versions; they should be able to coexist >just fine. > That would be nice and reasonably simple if it were an option. Unfortunately, the two versions are incompatible. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ********************************************************************** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * *--------------------------------------------------------------------* * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * * -- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * **********************************************************************