Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:36:31 +0100 From: Daniel Roethlisberger <daniel@roe.ch> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portmaster and BROKEN ports Message-ID: <20080327093631.GB21592@hobbes.roe.ch> In-Reply-To: <47EACD31.2070803@FreeBSD.org> References: <20080325212146.GA32955@copernic.kti.ae.poznan.pl> <47E97F0F.10900@FreeBSD.org> <20080326085035.GA1756@copernic.kti.ae.poznan.pl> <47EACD31.2070803@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org> 2008-03-26: > Willy Picard wrote: > >portupgrade simply ignores BROKEN ports during a "portupgrade -a". I > >am not even asking about a similar behaviour for portmaster. I wanted > >just to ask if an option allows to do the same. If no such an option > >exists, I think that its addition to the functionality of portmaster > >may be worth considering. > > I think it's important for users to know when their ports go into a > BROKEN state, so ignoring them is not an option. If a user actually > wants to ignore a port that is BROKEN, the +IGNOREME mechanism is > available, as you pointed out. Of course the user wants to be notified of all ports which cannot be upgraded for some reason (broken, marked BROKEN, removed/missing origin, etc.), but forcing the upgrade to abort because of a problem with a single port does not make sense. It means that portmaster can only be run successfully if all the installed ports are in a 100% upgradable state, which in my experience is basically almost never, except on production servers with only a few well-maintained ports installed. To keep a box current with portmaster, I have to manually mark each of the non-upgradable ports with +IGNOREME files after portmaster bails out, and restart portmaster. I will then have to periodically check back manually whether the problems went away in the meantime. This is unacceptable for me; too much manual intervention. I would very much prefer to have an option that tells portmaster to skip non-upgradable ports and those that depend on them, and notify me in form of a concise, greppable list after the portmaster run. This is actually the number one reason I switched back to portupgrade. Other than that, portmaster would be the tool of my choice. -Dan -- Daniel Roethlisberger <daniel@roe.ch>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080327093631.GB21592>