Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:14:32 -0500
From:      Neal Hogan <>
To:        Frank Shute <>, Neal Hogan <>,, Ryan Flannery <>
Subject:   Re: portupdate xorg-server
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Frank Shute <> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 03:21:05PM -0500, Neal Hogan wrote:
> >
> > The last couple of days I've been running portupgrade -av and am to the
> > point where I'd like to move onto something else, but there is one
> package
> > that won't upgrade . . . xorg-server. As you can see below, it claims
> that
> > there is a missing header and there are a fair amount of reported errors.
> > I'm not the best at deciphering the stuff below.
> >
> > I've tried make deinstalling/reinstalling and individually portupgrading
> it
> > to no avail.
> >
> > suggestions?
> >
> > glxdriswrast.c:39:39: error: GL/internal/dri_interface.h: No such file or
> > directory
> $ pkg_info -W /usr/local/include/GL/internal/dri_interface.h
> /usr/local/include/GL/internal/dri_interface.h was installed by package
> xf86driproto-2.0.3

I wish to not only that Frank for his patience and subtle hand-holding, but
also address the rest of the list.

First, concerning the issue Mr. Shute responded to . . .
I reinstalled xf86driproto, which installed the dri_interface.h, which
allowed me to pkg_add xorg-server. However, it was the older version of
xorg-server. So, I ran portupgrade on it and it, again, claims that there is
no dri_interface.h. According to pkg_version, all xorg and xf86 ports are
up-to-date, except xorg-server of which there is a newer version.

That said, I was hoping that you can help me understand the portupgrade
process b/c it can be a bit frustrating when it runs for a LONG time only to
have upgrades fail. Please don't take my tone to be anything other than one
coming from a sense of curiosity. I don't mean to suggest anything about the
fBSD ports system. Perhaps my experience is the result of my own oversight.

Just to be clear, here are the steps I took:
1) #portsnap fetch
2) #portsnap extract
3) #portsnap update
4) #pkgdb -u
5) #pkgdb -F
6) #portupgrade -av

As I noted in another post, some ports fail to upgrade when using
portupgrade -a, no matter how many times it is run. However, they (those
that fail), along with their dependencies, do upgrade when portupgraded
individually (or de/reinstalled). I thought the purpose of having a ports
system, where you install the ports tree and use portupgrade, was to make
the install/upgrade easy and rather painless, such that all ports and their
dependencies are "taken care of."

 As I write this I am running portupgrade individually, on those ports that
failed to upgrade with -a option, but have (so far) succeeded in upgrading
individually. I am simply looking at the output of pkg_version to find those
that are not up-to-date.

I could see if ports failed to upgrade or were ignored due to there being no
diff between what's installed and that which is in the updated tree.

Can someone shed some light on this? Thanks a lot for taking the time.


> HTH.
> <snip>
> Regards,
> --
>  Frank
>  Contact info:


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>