Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:47:13 +0100 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with portupgrade && xscreensaver-gnome Message-ID: <20080731144713.64cd0099@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <20080731081628.cfb49084.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <20080730085123.81542622.wmoran@collaborativefusion.com> <g6ql7b$d5g$1@ger.gmane.org> <20080730174510.ab0871a3.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <g6qp8u$pm4$2@ger.gmane.org> <20080730183307.925ade48.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <48914065.5020901@FreeBSD.org> <20080731081628.cfb49084.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:16:28 -0400 Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote: > In response to Doug Barton <dougb@FreeBSD.org>: > > > For the same reason that portmaster dies on errors, neither program > > is omniscient. :) If ports tools hit a point where it's not clear > > how to proceed they _should_ stop and get user input. The next > > thing the users generally say is that it should "somehow" proceed > > with the rest of the upgrade, finish things that don't rely on the > > broken bits, etc. Unfortunately that is quite a bit harder to do > > than you might think, although patches are always welcome. > > Understood. But keep in mind that this was not an error, it was a > warning. Perhaps the ports infrastructure doesn't differentiate > between those two as much as I think. It's actually nothing to do with the ports infrastructure, this has no effect on a normal manual build, or on portmaster. The warning is treated as an error by portupgrade. If you remove the 2>&1 redirection in line 1463 of portupgrade, the port will be built. I don't know if it has a good reason for treating writes to stderr as fatal errors, or not. No other port uses ".warning", they all use "echo" or IGNORE.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080731144713.64cd0099>