Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2014 14:31:02 +0100 From: Andrea Venturoli <ml@netfence.it> To: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ICU sweeping upgrade: bug or feature? Message-ID: <52F78316.2010502@netfence.it> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1402081001470.35659@wonkity.com> References: <52F6132C.3070406@netfence.it> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1402081001470.35659@wonkity.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/08/14 18:08, Warren Block wrote: > This may very well come back to bite you in the future, Well, as I said, this is just a temporary fix for something that, IMVHO, shouldn't have broken in the first place. > causing > mysterious failures long after you've forgotten you did it. I periodically clean /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg, so it shouldn't be long before the links and the libraries they are aliasing are both gone. However, what is different here from what portupgrade usually does (i.e. leaving old libraries in that compat dir)? > Running pkg_libchk [-q] after port upgrades has worked well for me. It > is from sysutils/bsdadminscripts by Dominic Fandrey, and easily detects > applications that are using old libraries and should be rebuilt. It > worked this time also. I normally use sysutils/libchk. I never tried pkg_libchk, but I'm curious. What is the advantage of one over the other? bye & Thanks av.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?52F78316.2010502>