Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 23:49:11 -0800 From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net> To: FreeBSD - questions <questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Portupgrade (vs. Portmanager) question Message-ID: <4247B6F7.8010508@att.net> In-Reply-To: <200503272151.29109.ringworm01@gmail.com> References: <20050328044052.75667.qmail@web53909.mail.yahoo.com> <42479915.5040202@att.net> <200503272151.29109.ringworm01@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michael C. Shultz wrote: > It would be nice if the ports make options were better documented, but > you can read through /usr/ports/Mk/bsd.port.mk and find information > on the various options. > > here is an example: > > # all-depends-list > # - Show all directories which are dependencies > # for this port. > > then > > cd /usr/ports/lang/ezm3/ > make all-depends-list > > result: > > /usr/ports/converters/libiconv > /usr/ports/devel/gettext > /usr/ports/devel/gmake > /usr/ports/devel/libtool15 > > -Mike > Mike, That's great info, thank you. It really helps put this into perspective. I did portmanager -sl and it identifies 7 candidates for deletion. It identifies cvsup-without-gui and also identifies ezm3 upon which it depends. Am I missing something here or shouldn't ezm3 not been identified as a "leaf port"? Jay
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4247B6F7.8010508>