Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:28:45 -0500 From: Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> To: Fernan Aguero <fernan@iib.unsam.edu.ar> Cc: FreeBSD GNOME Users <gnome@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: fixes and comments on the upgrade script procedure Message-ID: <1100050125.17375.36.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> In-Reply-To: <20041110011850.GB28553@iib.unsam.edu.ar> References: <20041109204948.GA1732@iib.unsam.edu.ar> <1100037439.17375.9.camel@shumai.marcuscom.com> <20041110011850.GB28553@iib.unsam.edu.ar>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-CuOLVtPfmlUfbBvvD8b2 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 22:18 -0300, Fernan Aguero wrote: > +----[ Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus@marcuscom.com> (09.Nov.2004 18:56): > | > | On Tue, 2004-11-09 at 17:49 -0300, Fernan Aguero wrote: > | > Hi! > | >=20 > | > I'm running the upgrade script since yesterday ... I hoped > | > to have it finished by now, but anyway ... since I had > | > some spare time, and lacking a better thing to > | > do I decided to read the upgrade script :)=20 > | >=20 > | > Attached is a diff with what I think should be corrected. > |=20 > | The comment diff is fine, but the other is not needed. You must have > | downloaded an old version of the script. >=20 > Probably ... i downloded it the day you posted the message > on the availability of gnome 2.8.1 in ports. >=20 > | > Also, it seems that though not explicitly specified in the > | > script, the upgrade procedure tried to rebuild openoffice. > | > This together with mozilla and firefox helps explain the > | > long time it is taking. Apart from the time issue, what > | > happened is that the attempt to build OOo made the upgrade > | > fail when /usr filled up. I never build OOo from sources, > | > and always use packages. I just don't have the space to > | > build such a monster. Perhaps it may be possible to perform a > | > 'dry-run' of the script, just checking what would be done > | > and thus allow the user to exclude some beasts? > |=20 > | Patches are welcome. However, you can also specify portupgrade flags t= o > | the script to attempt to upgrade from packages if available. > |=20 > | Joe > | > +----] >=20 > Yes, but these flags would affect all the ports, wouldn't > they? I've just listed openoffice-* in HOLD_PKGS based on > the suggestion by Adam W. Yes, they would affect all ports, but I don't think adding openoffice-* to HOLD_PKGS will help. We run portupgrade -f, and that bypasses HOLD_PKGS. Joe --=-CuOLVtPfmlUfbBvvD8b2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBBkW7Nb2iPiv4Uz4cRAms0AJ9T4GyA4PNXqjh/uKJCavWGxlTUAACdHU1H oqHYsr4/kbugm4eKdyvj3Ww= =DdrU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-CuOLVtPfmlUfbBvvD8b2--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1100050125.17375.36.camel>