Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:35:52 +0000 From: RW <list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: when to use 'Portupgrade -R' Message-ID: <200412112235.52792.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> In-Reply-To: <20041211103936.57e5b030@localhost> References: <20041211103936.57e5b030@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 11 December 2004 20:39, Robert Marella wrote: > On Friday 10 December 2004 14:54, Jonathon McKitrick wrote: > > I've run into some problems using 'portupgrade -R' so I'm wondering if > > just using 'portupgrade' is good enough in most cases. I don't want a > > port to be upgraded without NECESSARY dependencies, but I don't want > > minor upgrades done UNNECESSARILY that might cause inconsistencies in the > > database. > > Hi Jonathon > > I am using Gnome 2.8 nad for what it is worth, here is how I do it. > > cvsup all ports > pkgdb -F > > #portversion -l "<" > upgrading > #vi upgrading > using edit tools I remove all "tabs '<' and 'cr'" > I am fairly proficient with vi and can do this quickly (using the "D" > "J"). I am sure the "script gurus" can do this in one fell swoop > but I am a newbie. > I also insert "portupgrade" in front of the list of ports. > #sh upgrading > go get a beer! > usually I try to do this once a week and there are from 10 to 20 ports that > need updating. sometimnes I have to repeat the "go get a beer" step. > > If we are to trust "portversion" then I don't think the -r or -R switch > would be needed. Feedback from more knowledgeable members is welcome. > This is just equivalent to running portupgrade -a It will upgrade more ports than portupgrade -R <port-name> As far as Gnome is concerned, the best thing to do is follow the instructions give here <http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200412112235.52792.list-freebsd-2004>