Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 19:46:33 -0400 From: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> To: Thomas Moestl <t.moestl@tu-bs.de>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: knu@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portversion/portupgrade Message-ID: <p0521060bbafc47bbdcf2@[128.113.24.47]> In-Reply-To: <p0521060abafafc061e0c@[128.113.24.47]> References: <F455E4114C4AD211BCDF00805F31BCF312B27EE3@USSAM203> <20030528214711.GA94049@rot13.obsecurity.org> <p05210608bafae02394b7@[128.113.24.47]> <20030528220215.GA94270@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030528222144.GA667@crow.dom2ip.de> <20030528222244.GA94418@rot13.obsecurity.org> <20030528234914.GA1987@crow.dom2ip.de> <p0521060abafafc061e0c@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 10:34 PM -0400 5/28/03, Garance A Drosihn wrote:
>At 1:49 AM +0200 5/29/03, Thomas Moestl wrote:
>>I just got portupgrade to work on my box, however by changing
>>the dependency in the Makefile from ruby-bdb1 to ruby-bdb
>>(as already hinted in a comment) and dropping the attached
>>patch into files/ to make it use ruby-bdb instead of ruby-bdb1
>>by default.
>
>I followed the suggestions from Thomas, and it seems to be
>going OK for me. There were a few oddities in building things
>though, which I should figure out. Initially I somehow managed
>to build portupgrade without building ruby-bdb. It was even
>working fine, until I did tried 'portversion' and that complained
>about a stale-dependency (the missing ruby-bdb).
Okay, I'm not sure what happened to me yesterday, but I started
over from scratch again, and it seems to be working OK. I made
the makefile change that Thomas suggested, and added his patch.
I then ran into trouble because the makefiles for ruby and
ruby-devel want to rummage through PKG_DBDIR for out-of-date
ports. This does not work well if ruby is the first port you
make after removing /var/db/pkg (which is what I did). The
following update fixes that for lang/ruby-devel, and a similar
patch would be good for lang/ruby:
--- Makefile.orig Wed May 28 19:06:58 2003
+++ Makefile Thu May 29 19:18:32 2003
@@ -166,6 +166,8 @@
${INSTALL_DATA} ${WRKSRC}/ext/zlib/doc/zlib.rd ${RUBY_DOCDIR}
${CP} -R ${WRKSRC}/doc/* ${RUBY_DOCDIR}/
.endif
+# Have to make sure PKG_DBDIR exists before we `cd' into it.
+ @if ! test -d ${PKG_DBDIR} ; then mkdir ${PKG_DBDIR} ; fi
@${ECHO} "Deinstalling obsoleted packages that are now part of ruby..."
@cd ${PKG_DBDIR}; for portname in ${OBSOLETED_MODULES}; do \
for pkg in ${RUBY_PKGNAMEPREFIX}$$portname-*; do \
I must admit that I am uneasy that ruby-devel installs itself as
the package "ruby". This can be confusing, because you can
actually install both ruby and ruby-devel on sparc64. The ports
for sysutils/portupgrade and lang/ruby-devel do seem to do the
right things, it just looks a bit confusing. Also, if you then
go to pkg_deinstall ruby, it thinks you want to deinstall both
versions of ruby.
I also noticed that when ruby-devel is built, it prints out the
lines:
To build a ruby related port for Ruby 1.8, define
RUBY_VER=1.8 on the make command line or in
/etc/make.conf. If you want to use Ruby 1.8 as
the default instead of 1.6, define
RUBY_DEFAULT_VER=1.8 also.
I am inclined to put those lines in my /etc/make.conf, just in
case other ruby-related ports might be confused by this special
setup for sparc64.
However, with all that done, portupgrade, portversion and related
commands seem to be working OK for me. I will continue testing
things, but for now it seems to me that Thomas's patches for
portupgrade will solve the problems on sparc64.
--
Garance Alistair Drosehn = gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer or gad@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or drosih@rpi.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p0521060bbafc47bbdcf2>