From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Jun 29 19:53:40 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C6AC37B712 for ; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 19:53:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by picnic.mat.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA88369; Thu, 29 Jun 2000 22:53:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 22:53:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: John Daniels Cc: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 'make deinstall' questions In-Reply-To: <20000629170201.42302.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 29 Jun 2000, John Daniels wrote: > Hi: > > Sometimes when I 'make deinstall' I get a message that a certain director > could not be fully deleted, or some other thing can not be done to > completely eliminate or clean the install. This is true even when I have > 'su'-ed to root. For example, I recently deinstalled apache and it > complained that it couldn't completely remove three directories (I don't > remember the exact ones, something like: /usr/local/www ,for example. Can > someone explain why this happens? Are their any lingering effects? For > example, I would like to reinstall Apache at some point, will an incomplete > 'deinstall' cause any problems? This is usually because there are instructions in the port's PLIST that cause a directory to be deleted on deinstall (package removal). The directory in question wasn't empty when all of the files that the PLIST listed to go into that directory were deleted, so the directory (not being empty) couldn't be removed. Usually, that's relatively harmless, except that it causes some disk bloat. It's usually because: 1) the port was installed multiple times as the version changed, and so the files listed changed as newer ports replaced older ones. 2) There was an error in the original port's PLIST. that's increasingly rarer nowadays, with the automated ports testing that goes on. 3) the port itself established some new configuration files in the directory in question, perhaps as some new feature was user-configured. These new files weren't caught during the initial install screening. Overwhelmingly, it's because reason #1. Don't lose sleep over it, unless you happen to be able to identify the file(s) involved, and want to submit a PR over it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include C & Java programming, FreeBSD, chuckr@picnic.mat.net | electronics, communications, and signal processing. New Year's Resolution: I will not sphroxify gullible people into looking up fictitious words in the dictionary. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message