Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 15:17:34 +0300 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@apropo.ro> To: Jari Kirma <kirma@cs.hut.fi> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Garbage collection of installed packages Message-ID: <20040426151734.3d2046d8@it.buh.cameradicommercio.ro> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404261356200.24624@hutcs.cs.hut.fi> References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0404261356200.24624@hutcs.cs.hut.fi>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 14:14:18 +0300 (EEST)
Jari Kirma <kirma@cs.hut.fi> wrote:
>
> I have been observing how over long time, fbsd systems tend to gain
> packages that have been installed as a dependency of some other package,
> but later the original dependency leading to their installation has either
> changed to something else or disappeared completely, leaving package
> that's never explicitly installed nor required by any other package. So,
> my question is, is there an easy way to recognise these "garbage"
> packages?
>
> Only obvious way to do this, at least that I've thought of, would be to
> have "explicitly required" flag in the package, or a dependency on a
> special package which would contain all potentially top-level packages.
> Problem with this, and all scenarios is that packages that would have
> installed as "explicitly requred" (not as a dependency of some other
> package) can be used, for instance by developers, without flagging them
> explicitly required after all. Anyway, a suggestion more informed hint
> about which installed packages are actually garbage, would be nice. (In
> above scenario, such packages would be ones without explicitly required
> flag and without any other packages requiring them.)
sysutils/pkg_tree
This program generates a graphical tree of packages and their dependan-
cies.
--
IOnut
Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040426151734.3d2046d8>