Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:45:20 -0800 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: portmaster some_port vs. portmaster 'some_port*' Message-ID: <496EDB80.4020908@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20090115084013.268c7be5@it.buh.tecnik93.com> References: <20090114203941.7516d639@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <496E62F8.6080103@FreeBSD.org> <20090115084013.268c7be5@it.buh.tecnik93.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ion-Mihai Tetcu wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:11:04 -0800
> Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>> When portmaster gets multiple ports on the command line (whether via a
>> glob or via a list) the initial portmaster process acts like a task
>> scheduler. The parent spawns new portmaster processes for each
>> individual port and keeps track of the various issues such as
>> dependencies already updated, etc. When all the ports listed have been
>> updated the parent cleans up the temp files and exits.
>
> Hmm, then can you please document this explicitly in the man page?
>
> From my point of view it should also check the dependency relation
> between whatever it gets after parsing the command line ( N ports, M
> ports as a result of a wild-card, ...).
The dependency checking happens as a natural result of the normal
upgrade process of each port. The only thing different in the
"multi-port" case is that for each dependency a given port's portmaster
process checks if that dependency is otherwise up to date but is on the
list of multi-ports, it is marked for upgrade anyway.
> Else I'm afraid it is a nice way to self-foot-shooting.
I'm afraid that I don't see what problem you're concerned about. If you
could state your concern more clearly I can try to address it.
Meanwhile if you can reproduce something, let me know.
Regards,
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?496EDB80.4020908>