From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 24 04:08:58 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 BFB4D106566B for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 04:08:58 +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 9DED08FC08 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2009 04:08:58 +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 n6O48s5n028492; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:08:54 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 23:08:54 -0500 (CDT) From: Scott Bennett Message-Id: <200907240408.n6O48sS0028491@mp.cs.niu.edu> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, shuvaev@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de 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: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 04:08:59 -0000 Hi Alexey, On Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:01:33 +0200 Alexey Shuvaev wrote: >On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 07:52:11AM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote: >> I wrote: >> > 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. >> > >> > 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, >> >> My mistake. portmanager -u is supposed to accomplish roughly >> what portmaster -a or portupgrade -a accomplishes. I meant to write >> portmanager -u -ip packagename rather than what I wrote before. >> >> >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. >> > >If only you have RTFM %) Well, I had read it, but didn't mention it because... >>From man portmaster: > > /var/db/pkg/*/+IGNOREME > If this file exists, several things will happen: > > 1. The port will be ignored for all purposes, including > dependency updates, if there is no directory for it in > /usr/ports, and there is no entry for it in /usr/ports/MOVED. > If the -v option is used, the fact that the port is being > ignored will be mentioned. > > 2. If using the > -L option, and a new version exists, the existence of the > +IGNOREME file will be mentioned. > > 3. If you do a regular update of the port, or if the > -a option is being used, you will be asked if you want to > update the port anyway; unless the -u option is being used, in > which case the port will be ignored. > >So, >touch /var/db/pkg/openoffice.org-XXXX/+IGNOREME >would do the trick. > ...I figured that the next time either cvsup or portsnap--I normally use the latter--were run to update the ports tree, that it would "correct" such changes as being discrepancies from the official version of the ports tree. I don't want to use a method that would have to be done manually every time I run portsnap. If that is mistaken, please let me know. Also, the /etc/portupgrade.conf method allows a list of ports one does not want automatically rebuilt to be kept in a single location, rather than as files dispersed throughout the ports directory tree, which I grant was not the issue I was originally posting about, but it is an advantage over the +IGNOREME method. Here's a related question. Where can I find a list/table of advantages and disadvantages for each of portmanager, portmaster, and portupgrade? I don't want a flame war, just a list or table, so that I can decide for myself which set of advantages and disadvantages will serve me best or will piss me off least. :-) 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 * **********************************************************************