From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 24 15:15:09 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6F5A106564A for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:15:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Received: from eastrmfepo103.cox.net (eastrmfepo103.cox.net [68.230.241.215]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ED6C8FC0C for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:15:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eastrmimpo209.cox.net ([68.230.241.224]) by eastrmfepo103.cox.net (InterMail vM.8.01.04.00 201-2260-137-20101110) with ESMTP id <20120124151503.IOJG28068.eastrmfepo103.cox.net@eastrmimpo209.cox.net> for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:15:03 -0500 Received: from serene.no-ip.org ([98.164.86.55]) by eastrmimpo209.cox.net with bizsmtp id RTF21i00c1BeFqy02TF394; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:15:03 -0500 X-CT-Class: Clean X-CT-Score: 0.00 X-CT-RefID: str=0001.0A020208.4F1ECAF7.00AC,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0 X-CT-Spam: 0 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=hUCJ0Gz5LjRqF1xLPeCnm9rLnz3DdW5ICkn8EI10KF4= c=1 sm=1 a=EnZeqY4DioAA:10 a=G8Uczd0VNMoA:10 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=fdHYxQQoAueMHNSmXppgDg==:17 a=6I5d2MoRAAAA:8 a=kviXuzpPAAAA:8 a=2yyA0XvX2nHWy3Tme5UA:9 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=SV7veod9ZcQA:10 a=4vB-4DCPJfMA:10 a=fdHYxQQoAueMHNSmXppgDg==:117 X-CM-Score: 0.00 Authentication-Results: cox.net; none Received: from cox.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by serene.no-ip.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0OFF22j043552 for ; Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:15:02 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from conrads@cox.net) Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:14:57 -0600 From: "Conrad J. Sabatier" To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120124091457.66d23583@cox.net> In-Reply-To: <4F1EBE51.3050300@freebsd.org> References: <20120124081905.5f497763@cox.net> <4F1EBE51.3050300@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd10.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: "portmaster -o" behaves a little strangely (IMHO) X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2012 15:15:09 -0000 On Tue, 24 Jan 2012 09:21:05 -0500 Michael Scheidell wrote: > > On 1/24/12 9:19 AM, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > > # portmaster -CK -o lang/gcc46 gcc-4.4.7.20111108 > > > what happens with: > > # portmaster -CK -o lang/gcc46 lang/gcc44 > > ? Well, since gcc44 is no longer installed, I just tried: portmaster -o lang/gcc47 lang/gcc46 And the actions that started were much more along the lines of what I was expecting. The build of gcc47 is currently underway as I write this. So, it seems it's not a good idea to "mix and match" port origins with port names in the case of this particular option. Could this be considered a "bug"? It certainly seems to at least qualify as a "quirk", I would say. :-) -- Conrad J. Sabatier conrads@cox.net