Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 9 Sep 2014 12:55:22 -0400 (EDT)
From:      doug <doug@fledge.watson.org>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: here we go again w/ pkg ....
Message-ID:  <alpine.BSF.2.11.1409091241230.43447@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <540F1F11.8010601@hiwaay.net>
References:  <540ED049.8010602@club-internet.fr> <540F1F11.8010601@hiwaay.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Tue, 9 Sep 2014, William A. Mahaffey III wrote:

>>> I didn't do an actual ports update, just checked, using: portmaster -L
>>> |/  egrep '(ew|ort) version|total install' .... I guess that's enough to
>>> /mess up pkg ?
>
>> Why do you persist on the idea there is something messed up? You have a 
>> ports tree showing updated versions of some ports and official package 
>> repositories which are temporarily lagging behind, that?s all!
>> 
>> Hope it helps,
>> Juan
>
>
> Because I wasn't clear on the degree of connection between ports & pkgng, 
> possibly due to my noob status .... It'll clear up eventually ....

pkgng is simply an upgrade to the pkg_<command> set of commands. It did not 
change the relation between ports and packages. Once you have something 
installed it does not matter if you built it (ports) or installed it as a binary 
package.

If you install something really complex, say Xorg or KDE and then build 
some component and then sometime after that install a related package you can 
get some warning messages or even have some component replaced with an earlier 
version. BTW if I don't get it either, please, please chip in.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.11.1409091241230.43447>