Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:27:11 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> Cc: pav@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: purely package-based/oriented solution Message-ID: <20080424092711.10703q81vign1hkw@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <48102CCE.6020004@icyb.net.ua> References: <480E3F5E.3060501@icyb.net.ua> <1208903822.1548.62.camel@ikaros.oook.cz> <480F3B39.3090702@icyb.net.ua> <1208957957.58820.28.camel@pav.hide.vol.cz> <20080424080229.114632lxyo7mbi4g@webmail.leidinger.net> <48102CCE.6020004@icyb.net.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua> (from Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:46:38 +0300= ): > on 24/04/2008 09:02 Alexander Leidinger said the following: >> Quoting Pav Lucistnik <pav@FreeBSD.org> (from Wed, 23 Apr 2008 >> 15:39:17 +0200): >> >>> Andriy Gapon p=C3=AD=C5=A1e v st 23. 04. 2008 v 16:35 +0300: >> >>>> BTW, strange thing: >>>> $ portupgrade -a -PP >>>> ... >>>> ** Port marked as IGNORE: devel/linux_kdump: >>>> does not build with the default linux base, use the =20 >>>> package instead >>>> >>>> What's this about? :-) I do say to use packages only. >>> Guess portupgrade still looks at the ports tree. What happens if you try >>> to rm -rf /usr/ports first? >> >> If someone knows a better way of handling this (using something else >> than IGNORE, with the same effect to people trying to build it from >> ports but with a better behavior when used with portupgrade -PP), I'am >> all ears (a better way of fixing this would be to include preparsed >> linux stuff, but there are more important things on my TODO list...). > > Alexander, > > I am not completely sure what your question was. portupgrade moans because linux_kdump contains IGNORE. If someone =20 knows something with a similar behavior as above which could =20 replace/extend IGNORE, portupgrade may behave better. > My concern is: why on -PP mode portupgrade needs ports at all? Why not > just go to package repository and check what you've got there. You could do a feature request which would switch portupgrade to this =20 behavior if a special command line switch is given (maybe -PPP). > I do not demand that portupgrade be tailored to my needs, I am just > saying that it doesn't meet them. And there's nothing written in stone that it can not be changed to =20 suit your needs too... Bye, Alexander. --=20 When I demanded of my friend what viands he preferred, He quoth: "A large cold bottle, and a small hot bird!" =09=09-- Eugene Field, "The Bottle and the Bird" http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080424092711.10703q81vign1hkw>