Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 14 Jul 2003 13:50:11 -0500
From:      Kirk Strauser <kirk@strauser.com>
To:        Jonathan <jonathan@sirtis.org.uk>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Use linux_base-debian instead of linux_base?
Message-ID:  <873ch9j63g.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net>
In-Reply-To: <3F12E1FE.5070101@sirtis.org.uk> (jonathan@sirtis.org.uk's message of "Mon, 14 Jul 2003 18:01:50 %2B0100")
References:  <87k7aljbvb.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net> <3F12E1FE.5070101@sirtis.org.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

At 2003-07-14T17:01:50Z, Jonathan <jonathan@sirtis.org.uk> writes:

Jonathan,

> Take a look at portupgrade (/usr/ports/sysutils/portupgrade) which has
> portinstall, which you can use instead of cd /usr/ports/blah/blah && make

I've been using portupgrade for ages, but I hadn't thought about using it to
work around the problem.

> Then you can configure in /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf using
> ALT_PKGDEP. The sample in the config says:

>    #   ALT_PKGDEP =3D {
>    #     # If you use apache13-modssl instead of apache13
>    #     'apache-1.3.*' =3D> 'apache+mod_ssl-1.3.*',

I've added this to my pkgtools.conf (and the portupgrade port is the current
version):

  ALT_PKGDEP =3D {
    'linux_base' =3D> 'linux_base-debian'
  }

but it doesn't seem to make a difference.  Do I have to do something to make
portinstall aware of that setting?
=2D-=20
Kirk Strauser

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQA/Evtm5sRg+Y0CpvERAh1JAJ9HT9pBVZCAwaAZKUFLd+zWOkl+4QCfQdFV
E9FkItFbGnxbFa2jASByiRs=
=19IW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?873ch9j63g.fsf>