Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 20:09:46 +0400 From: Ruslan Makhmatkhanov <cvs-src@yandex.ru> To: Bryan Drewery <bdrewery@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r313614 - head Message-ID: <513A0D4A.8070806@yandex.ru> In-Reply-To: <5139D8AF.9060208@FreeBSD.org> References: <201303080349.r283nfQl036658@svn.freebsd.org> <513977E5.9060605@yandex.ru> <513978B7.9000107@FreeBSD.org> <513998D0.1070401@yandex.ru> <5139D8AF.9060208@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bryan Drewery wrote on 08.03.2013 16:25: > Probably. > > Portmaster can only handle 1 "-o" at a time. It re-executes itself in an > ugly hack to replace the package. So it simply just removes the old and > installs the new. > > Portupgrade and pkg(8) act on jobs/transactions of a set of packages to > upgrade. It does seem reasonable that if the origin AND pkgname have > changed then a downgrade should not have to be forced. It's just more > complexity to put into the transaction calculation since (for both) it > is now mostly a "remove all versions older than the current". > > I actually think I may have fixed this case in portupgrade already, but > am not sure. > > For pkg(8) I've entered this at https://github.com/pkgng/pkgng/issues/464 Thank you for an explanation and for a bug report to yourself :). -- Regards, Ruslan Tinderboxing kills... the drives.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?513A0D4A.8070806>