From owner-freebsd-ports Fri Sep 17 3: 7:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.13]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A08A614F9F for ; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 03:07:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from smap@localhost) by dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id FAA15646; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 05:07:33 -0500 (CDT) Received: from sji-ca50-38.ix.netcom.com(209.111.213.38) by dfw-ix13.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma015640; Fri Sep 17 05:07:14 1999 Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id DAA40886; Fri, 17 Sep 1999 03:07:09 -0700 (PDT) To: Christoph Kukulies Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dependency check References: <199909170922.LAA16650@gil.physik.rwth-aachen.de> From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 17 Sep 1999 03:07:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: Christoph Kukulies's message of "Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:22:39 +0200 (CEST)" Message-ID: Lines: 12 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: Christoph Kukulies * I'm wondering whether the ports dependency mechanism * takes into account that an a.out binary of a program * may be there (or the port may be in the pkg db) * but fails in the end since aout shared libs * aren't existing anymore. No. It is not the ports infrastructure's responsibility to make sure that the user hasn't botched the upgrade process. ;) Satoshi To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message