Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 23:24:00 -0600 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> Cc: Kevin <battdude@gmail.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portupgrade failure Message-ID: <20091217052400.GC32037@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <19241.45040.505925.616766@jerusalem.litteratus.org> References: <7314e5020912161917s355d02c9l16c996043c753044@mail.gmail.com> <19241.45040.505925.616766@jerusalem.litteratus.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 11:13:36PM -0500, Robert Huff wrote: > The maintainer, ruby@, is aware of this; a check of the PR > database shows multiple open PRs, none critical but many serious > going back six months and more. As an aside, the Severity and Priority fields have been so often abused as to have become meaningless. Although I still try to groom the db for "critical" ones, and thus try to get those some attention, I really don't think the committers pay much attention. (In general I think those should be reserved for "data corruption" and "security".) The longer-term solution is to remove those as user-settable fields. > This hard to understand given portupgrade is the recommended upgrade > tool. Once the individual who was working on it gave it up to the mailing list, it became one of those "everyone is responsible so no one is responsible" problems. I don't have a recommended fix for this. Having said that, I have a ports tree as of a month ago and portupgrade was working ok for me. I don't have the cycles to go figure out where it fails to be able to fix it, sorry. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091217052400.GC32037>