Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:15:23 -0500 From: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: "Conrad J. Sabatier" <conrads@cox.net>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portupgrade -> portmaster Rosetta Stone? Message-ID: <20306.2907.309020.842953@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <4F51D392.8080605@FreeBSD.org> References: <CA%2BE3k93doEmK7YpiZLgBCB5WUmOeCCLLLQBak_-Nx8sGqiafhQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABzXLYM47FjwmEvKijOp41Hn0KhTTPJ-dnX58PxTS8oUff-THQ@mail.gmail.com> <4F4BA7CE.20107@FreeBSD.org> <20120303010602.6daeb272@cox.net> <4F51D392.8080605@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton writes: > On 3/2/2012 11:06 PM, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > > Doug, is there a way to emulate portupgrade's "-k" (keep going) option, > > to have the remaining list of ports to be built still continue > > processing even if one port's build fails? > > You haven't missed it, the answer is no. It's part of that > "portmaster can't read minds" problem that if something fails, I > have no way of knowing if the rest of the updates should stop as > a result. But ... isn't this a case where you don't have to read minds? It seems (to me) the user would be saying "I understand the risk, and accept responsibility for dealing with the consequences.". At that point, whether thet're right or wrong is not your problem .... Robert Huff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20306.2907.309020.842953>