From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 28 07:24:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB75916A4CE; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:24:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hotmail.com (bay2-dav3.bay2.hotmail.com [65.54.246.107]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A773743D31; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:24:36 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tssajo@hotmail.com) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:24:01 -0700 Received: from 24.24.201.219 by BAY2-DAV3.phx.gbl with DAV; Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:23:49 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [24.24.201.219] X-Originating-Email: [tssajo@hotmail.com] X-Sender: tssajo@hotmail.com From: "Zoltan Frombach" To: "Collin J. Kreklow" , References: <20041027173212.GA59754@xor.obsecurity.org> <20041027190416.GA70873@ei.bzerk.org> <20041027211531.GC59489@dragon.nuxi.com> <20041028063144.GA20869@jupiter.kreklow.us> Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 00:23:52 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Message-ID: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Oct 2004 07:24:01.0098 (UTC) FILETIME=[189DB2A0:01C4BCBF] cc: Ruben de Groot cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: Portupgrade -af question X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 07:24:36 -0000 Great! Is there any chance this gets included in the official portupgrade program? Zoltan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Collin J. Kreklow" To: Cc: "Zoltan Frombach" ; "Ruben de Groot" ; "Kris Kennaway" ; "David O'Brien" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:31 PM Subject: Re: Portupgrade -af question > On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 02:15:31PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 12:34:51PM -0700, Zoltan Frombach wrote: >> > >Yes. Wouldn't it be a nice feature for "portupgrade -P" to install the >> > >port instead of the package if any non-defaults were defined in >> > >pkgtools.conf? >> > >> > If you really want to add this to portupgrade, it should be optional, >> > though. Because someone might have a broken compiler or something and >> > just >> > wants to install a binary package quickly. In that case it should be >> > possible to force a binary package installation regardless of what's >> > inside >> > the pkgtools.conf file. Don't you agree? >> >> 'portupgrade -PP' can still be used for that. > > I believe that the attached patch will cause portupgrade to build a port > when make options are specified either in pkgtools.conf or with the -m > option, unless -PP/--use-packages-only is specified. I am by no means a > Ruby expert, but this appears to do the correct thing for all the > combinations of MAKE_ARGS, -m, -P and -PP I could come up with. > > Collin