Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:37:56 -0700 From: Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> To: Matthias Andree <matthias.andree@gmx.de> Cc: Scott Bennett <bennett@cs.niu.edu>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: getting bogged down by malfunctioning ports subsystem Message-ID: <4A7B14F4.7080401@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <op.ux8gl7lr1e62zd@merlin.emma.line.org> References: <200908051052.n75AqSAI005906@mp.cs.niu.edu> <4A7A5018.1050108@FreeBSD.org> <op.ux8gl7lr1e62zd@merlin.emma.line.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matthias Andree wrote:
> Am 06.08.2009, 05:38 Uhr, schrieb Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>:
>
>
>> I have considered changing the order of how portmaster does things from:
>>
>> build
>> backup package (unless -B)
>> deinstall
>> install
>>
>> to:
>> backup package
>> deinstall
>> build
>> install
>>
>> That is undoubtedly more dangerous, and would require the "automated
>> backout" feature that I have yet to write, but it would solve a lot of
>> these problems.
>
> I recall very few cases where this change would have helped me; one was
> the recent GD2 update (arguably that would be a bug of the individual
> port - often an upstream bug - that picked up an old /usr/local library
> version during the build), and a minor one was an earlier
> e2fsprogs-libuuid issue (which was in fact just exposing genuine
> upstream bugs that impaired portability); it also impairs system
> functionality during the whole build phase.
I agree on both points, which is why I said I've considered it, not
done it yet. :)
Doug
--
This .signature sanitized for your protection
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A7B14F4.7080401>