From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Feb 8 16:50:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net [207.217.120.22]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3CAA37B65D for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:49:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from 1Cust54.tnt7.jackson.ms.da.uu.net (1Cust54.tnt7.jackson.ms.da.uu.net [63.31.188.54]) by hawk.prod.itd.earthlink.net (EL-8_9_3_3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA23437; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 16:49:52 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 19:49:45 -0500 (EST) From: Jim Weeks To: Niall Brady Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ports updating... Good ways? In-Reply-To: <20010209003551.A36700@walton.maths.tcd.ie> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Fri, 9 Feb 2001, Niall Brady wrote: > On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 07:18:50PM -0500, Jim Weeks wrote: > > > > You don't really have to do this. You can remove the info files for the > > old versions from /var/db/pkg/. For instance, if you have checked > > pkg_info and found you have two versions of zip ie zip-2.3 and zip-2.2, > > simply rm -r /var/db/pkg/zip-2.2 > > Not really... unless you're sure that the file list is exactly the > same in both, 'cos there's really no point leaving crud from old > programs lying around, as would happen if you did the above, rather > than deleting both, and installing the newest... While I do admit, there is a posibilty of leaving old unused files lying around, I find this a lot lessy messy than removing every dependacy on a production system and reinstalling. As with most responses on the list, this is not authoritative, and is simply what works best for me. I am adding this response back to the list in an effort to make this perfectly clear. Jim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message