Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 12:53:14 -0400 From: "b. f." <bf1783@googlemail.com> To: Ewald Jenisch <a@jenisch.at>, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ghostscript8 vs. ghostscrip9 conflict during portupgrade Message-ID: <CAGFTUwMFEBhxicKhubV9gWboYwK3oQ0SXLSuhSgKGUd3haJjcQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Seems like some ports depend on ghostscript8 whereas other depend on > ghostscript9. Unfortunately both ghostscript variants can't coexist on > the same system. To be specific: > > I've got ghostscript8 installed (ghostscript8-8.71_8) which is > required by a bunch of ports as per "pkg_info -Rx ghostscript8". When > running "pkgdb -F" it wants to install ghostscript9 since ImageMagick > depens on ghostscript9: The only ports that really need ghostscript8 will have a GHOSTSCRIPT_PORT entry pointing to print/ghostscript8 (I don't think there are any such ports at this time) -- otherwise they just happen to depend upon it because they were built with a non-default, user-defined WITH_GHOSTSCRIPT_VER value, or were built before the default ghostscript port was changed to print/ghostscript9. Problems like this are what the "-o" switches are for, in portmaster and portupgrade --read the manpage of the utility that you prefer, including the examples sections. Also, you should get in the habit of reading the recent additions to ports/UPDATING. If you are using portupgrade, you should probably do something like: portupgrade -o print/ghostscript9 print/ghostscript8 portupgrade -rfx ghostscript9 ghostscript b.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAGFTUwMFEBhxicKhubV9gWboYwK3oQ0SXLSuhSgKGUd3haJjcQ>