Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 23:24:31 +0300 From: "Sergey V. Dyatko" <sergey.dyatko@gmail.com> To: mexas@bris.ac.uk Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UPDATING 20130904 entry issues Message-ID: <20130911232431.00a4448c@laptop.minsk.domain> In-Reply-To: <201309111432.r8BEWe0Z001742@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> References: <201309111432.r8BEWe0Z001742@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 15:32:40 +0100 (BST) Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk> wrote: > ports/UPDATING from 20130904 has: > > # pkg query %ro libiconv >ports_to_update > # pkg delete -f libiconv > # cat ports_to_update | xargs portmaster > > So I have to delete a port on which >250 other > installed ports depend. After that I have *many* > unusable ports until the portmaster completes > the rebuilding, which, on my boxes, means days. mkdir /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/ cp /usr/local/lib/libiconv.so.3 /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/ before pkg delete > > In addition, my experience, at least on ia64, sparc64 > and amd64 is that such large updates never go smoothly. > > So, is it possible to reverse the procedure, and > update all ports which depend on libiconv before > deleting it? I'm thinking about the recommended > procedure for using "make delete-old-libs" for the > base OS. There new port builds automatically pick > the newever version of the shared lib. When the old > version is no longer used by any ports it can be > removed. > > Is it not possible to tell ports to first check > for libiconv in base, and if it is not there, > then install/use one from ports? > > Anton > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- wbr, tiger
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130911232431.00a4448c>