From owner-freebsd-apache@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 21 21:50:21 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apache@freebsd.org Received: from mx2.freebsd.org (mx2.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::35]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFE8A106564A for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:50:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from 172-17-198-245.globalsuite.net (hub.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::36]) by mx2.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2813314DB4D; Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:50:21 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4E7A5C1C.5000507@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 14:50:20 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110912 Thunderbird/6.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeremy Chadwick References: <4E78D844.6070001@p6m7g8.com> <4E79374E.2080609@p6m7g8.com> <20110921022133.GA27624@icarus.home.lan> In-Reply-To: <20110921022133.GA27624@icarus.home.lan> X-Enigmail-Version: undefined OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: apache@freebsd.org, Harlan Stenn , "Philip M. Gollucci" , Steve Kostecke Subject: Re: www/apache22 and devel/apr1 circular dependency X-BeenThere: freebsd-apache@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Support of apache-related ports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:50:21 -0000 On 09/20/2011 19:21, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:18:35PM -0700, Harlan Stenn wrote: >>>> On 9/20/11 4:22 PM, Harlan Stenn wrote: >>>>> We're seeing this problem to while trying to get apache22 upgraded: >>>>> >>>>> ===>>> Port directory: /usr/ports/converters/libiconv This is portmaster output, FYI. > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-apache/2011-September/002457.html I've read the thread, but I don't see any magic bullets to solve the problem. I use portmaster to update apache22, apr1, php, etc. all the time and don't see these kinds of problems. At this point it would probably be faster and easier to delete all the ports and start over. Since the user seems to be using portmaster I recommend the method in the end of the portmaster man page. That's most likely to avoid any of the existing problems with dependencies. hth, Doug -- Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much. -- OK Go Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS. Yours for the right price. :) http://SupersetSolutions.com/