Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 10:51:08 +0100 From: Olivier Tharan <olive@oban.frmug.org> To: Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libintl.so.2/4, portupgrade and evolution breakage Message-ID: <20030205095108.GF53198@weirdos.oban.frmug.org> In-Reply-To: <20030204175640.6F5087C7@fnord.ir.bbn.com> References: <20030204175640.6F5087C7@fnord.ir.bbn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Greg Troxel <gdt@ir.bbn.com> (20030204 12:56): > I have been uncomfortable with the 'upgrade just one package without > rebuilding the packages that depend on it' philosophy of portupgrade. I have used it until recently, and have been bitten once by a gettext library mismatch too. I now use the -r and -R options of portupgrade, which are useful after all; even if, as you said later, you are bound to compile more than needed. > It would be cool if portupgrade kept a database of packages whose > dependencies have been update, perhaps with an option to update those > in topological-sort order. When upgrading a package, anything that That is what the -rR options are for. The combination of portupgrade, portversion and pkgdb are very useful. portsdb and portsclean are, to a lesser extent. sysutils/libchk may prove useful too. -- olive To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030205095108.GF53198>