From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Aug 18 04:42:30 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA08660 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 04:42:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gregory.dyn.ml.org (cgowave-22-127.cgocable.net [24.226.22.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA08650 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 04:42:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dave@gregory.dyn.ml.org) From: dave@gregory.dyn.ml.org Received: from localhost (dave@localhost) by gregory.dyn.ml.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA03875 for ; Tue, 18 Aug 1998 07:41:45 -0400 Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 07:41:44 -0400 (EDT) To: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ports: must required ports always be rebuilt? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi, Ok, so I've been spoiled by FreeBSD's great port system... More and more lately I seem to come across ports that insist on having required package (ie. perl) living in the ports directory (ie. /usr/ports/lang/perl5/work/perl5.005_02/ ) rather than their real home (ie. /usr/local/bin/perl ). The result is that if I make clean one port that requires perl (and subsequently make clean perl), the next port that needs perl insists on trying to rebuild it. Ok, so this isn't a huge deal because it's fairly trivial to work around, but I don't recall this happening as frequently in the past. Any reason I'm seeing this more often? Recent examples are MySQL and P5-DBI. Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message