Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:25:26 -0400 From: Mikel King <mikel.king@olivent.com> To: "gpeel" <gpeel@thenetnow.com> Cc: matt donovan <kitchetech@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Wireshark Message-ID: <5C3E4935-D9C5-4EF8-AFC9-6902078F1FF2@olivent.com> In-Reply-To: <20080912093549.M8667@thenetnow.com> References: <9E39D6AD5B404616B48B2C0F0FF4DFA8@GRANT> <20080911221811.GA66228@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu> <3A83AB41D1FC429CBB1F8936382EF7FC@GRANT> <20080911233201.GB66228@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu> <28283d910809111638p8a16fc8rd50367a395b24f3b@mail.gmail.com> <20080912093549.M8667@thenetnow.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 12, 2008, at 5:39 AM, gpeel wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 19:38:50 -0400, matt donovan wrote >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Christopher Cowart < >> ccowart@rescomp.berkeley.edu> wrote: >> >>> Grant Peel wrote: >>>> Just attempting to install the port. Something I noticed when the > install >>>> crapped out was that it wanted me to use the "Force Package >>>> Register" > for >>>> the OpenSSL_Overwrite_Base port. >>>> >>>> That port was already installed, what would be the correct method >>>> to > deal >>>> with this? >>> >>> I usually only see this error with ports we've written in-house. >>> Usually >>> it happens because the dependency check on a specific file is bad. >>> The >>> check fails, which causes the port to believe it needs to install >>> the >>> dependency, but the package registry gets upset because the >>> package is >>> already installed and it doesn't think it needs to be reinstalled. >>> >>> If these are real ports, you might want to report the brokenness. >>> You'll >>> probably find that you can FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=1 and leave it at that >>> (though I typically treat it as a last resort and instead opt for >>> fixing >>> the port). >>> >>> -- >>> Chris Cowart >>> Network Technical Lead >>> Network & Infrastructure Services, RSSP-IT >>> UC Berkeley >>> >> >> I wrote this but gmail default reply is not reply-all >> >> go to the openssl port and run make replace and it should replace >> base but I actually don't really suggest it. >> >> since I don't really see a need to even from wireshark which I have >> installed without overwriting openssl_base >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org >> " > > Matt, Chris, > > First off, thanks for taking the time to reply :-) > > I am afraid however, that you have completely lost me. > > This is not the first time I have installed a port, and the > reccommendation > to use 'FORCE_PACKAGE_REGISTER" has been seen. Unfortunately, I have > no idea > what port you guys are suggesting is really broken, is it the > OpenSSL_Overwrite_Base or the one I am trying to install? > > If it is the OpenSSL one, can you explain in simple terms how I > should deal > with it? If you use FORCE_PACKAGE_REGISTER=yes and it still fails take a look to see what is actually installed. pkg_info -ia | grep Open_SSL The suggest installing portupgrade. Once that's complete you can portupgrade the port related to Open_SSL to see if that steps around the issue. m!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5C3E4935-D9C5-4EF8-AFC9-6902078F1FF2>