Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 23:02:36 GMT From: Salvo Bartolotta <bartequi@nojunk.com> To: Brett Taylor <brett@peloton.runet.edu> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG, rjoseph@nwlink.com Subject: Re: can't make certain ports Message-ID: <20000117.23023600@bartequi.ottodomain.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10001171445510.14175-100000@peloton.runet.edu> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10001171445510.14175-100000@peloton.runet.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< On 1/17/00, 8:49:28 PM, Brett Taylor <brett@peloton.runet.edu> wrote regarding Re: can't make certain ports: > Hi, > On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > > One of the responders to your question said 'make clean' removes the > > old source. I believe that this is incorrect. It removes the old > > OBJECT code, which of course is generated when the source is compiled. > > When a port is updated, at least three things must happen for you to > > be able to use the new version. > This is vague at best - make clean, in a port, removes everything in the > work directory and the work directory itself. It does not touch anything > in /usr/ports/distfiles. > > First, 'pkg_delete' or 'make deinstall'. It would seem to me that > > once you have cvsupped, the PKG list may have changed for the new > > version of the port, so a 'pkg_delete' would be more likely to remove > > every vestige of the old package. > The package listing in /var/db/pkg holds the old packing list. You can > have an updated version of a particular port, but the package registry > maintains the packing list for the version you installed. > > Second, 'make', possibly preceded by a 'make clean' just to be safe, > > if you like. This fetches and compiles the source, of course, and > > produces the binaries and man pages. > If you have no work directory, make clean is just holding you up. :-) > > I think one potential area of confusion is this: Again, IF I > > UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY (and i think i do ;-) 'make deinstall' calls > > pkg_delete, but if the makefile has been changed by a recent cvsup, > > there is always the possibility this may not work correctly, although > > it SHOULD. I generally use pkg_delete just to be safe. > Nope - as noted above - make deinstall calls pkg_delete which reads off > its OWN original packing list, not what's in > /usr/ports/some_dir/some_port/pkg/PLIST. > Brett > ***************************************************** > Dr. Brett Taylor brett@peloton.runet.edu * > Dept of Chem and Physics * > Curie 39A (540) 831-6147 * > Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics * > Walker 234 (540) 831-5410 * > ***************************************************** Dear Brett Taylor, thank you very much for clarifying. When I said "make clean deletes source code" I meant exactly what you indicated: the .../work subdirectory (or subtree) stuff. I apologize for not being accurate. I should probably have written "source-related code at large" e.g. such files as config.h, install.h, malloc.h, command.h command.c etc.; which is what I thought of and what made me use an improper expression. Specifically, I had in mind the content of the ...x11/kdebase11/work/... and subdirs stuff, as well as the gnome related stuff (e.g. .../x11-fm/gnomemc/work/... and subdirs stuff. That this was the case should have been clear from what followed -- I hope. I expressly indicated that the *old* tarballs (containing the compressed source code) might have interfered (bug ?) with the metaport mechanism; that is, they might have cheated it into believing that they were the *new* ones. That is why "make clean" should have been followed by "renaming" (or even deleting) the old tarballs. The KDE metaport has caused R.J. Wright some problems. Since I had (paranoidly) taken *two* snapshots of the entire ports collection, for testing purposes, at two different times, and I had succeeded in making KDE-1.1.2, I was trying to understand what went wrong for Joseph. Also, a few people think that "make deinstall" and pkg_delete perform the same identical action whereas they are NOT exactly synonymous. Thank you for drawing attention to this misleading delicate point once again. I hope not to be flamed for my inaccuracy ... and I hope that this reply does not contain additional lapsus calami (or even some weird error !!), either :-))) Best regards, Salvo Please note: nojunk.com ===> neomedia.it to e-mail to me. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000117.23023600>