Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 22 May 2019 13:25:40 +0100
From:      Grzegorz Junka <list1@gjunka.com>
To:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Reinstalling with dependencies
Message-ID:  <09545ba9-fce2-f3ed-f3c7-abedbffe718c@gjunka.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190522121743.biw6c5niia5tspr4@ivaldir.net>
References:  <dc938265-c181-f8e6-9a4d-1e9214497be1@gjunka.com> <20190522115101.tl36hg2wmclev3oq@ivaldir.net> <c11701e0-6808-e864-0ff7-8d178bf458b8@gjunka.com> <20190522121743.biw6c5niia5tspr4@ivaldir.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On 22/05/2019 13:17, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 01:11:05PM +0100, Grzegorz Junka wrote:
>> On 22/05/2019 12:51, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 12:43:33PM +0100, Grzegorz Junka wrote:
>>>> Is there any way to reinstall a package with all its dependencies?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am getting the following error:
>>>>
>>>> root@someserv:~ # pkg check -d
>>>> Checking all packages: 100%
>>>> elinks is missing a required shared library: libjs.so
>>>>
>>>>
>>> 2 reasons may happen for that to happen:
>>> 1/ spidermonkey17 does not have a proper SONAME for the libjs.so file it
>>> provides (bug 1)
>>> 2/ somehow the linked port seems to not register properly spidermonkey17 as a
>>> direct dependency of elinks when the option is checked (bug 2)
>>>
>>> I have checked the case 1 and yes libjs.so is buggy I haven't yet checked the
>>> case 2, but I quite sure there is a bug there as well, resulting in a package
>>> that does not have the proper dependencies registered at the creation
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Bapt
>>
>> Are you saying that even if elinks was reinstalled with dependencies that
>> wouldn't help?
>>
>> We have two issues here:
>>
>> 1. How to reinstall a package with dependencies (as stated in the subject)
>>
>> 2. Would reinstalling elinks with all dependencies fix the issue mentioned
>> in the email
>>
>> I have a couple more packages broken like elinks. I didn't include them
>> because I only wanted to post an example and assumed they would be fixed if
>> I reinstalled them properly. But here we go:
> No I do mean the elinks packages is probably broken when build with the option
> that brings in spidermonkey as a dependency
>> root@someserv:~ # pkg check -d
>> Checking all packages: 100%
>> elinks is missing a required shared library: libjs.so
>> fireflies is missing a required shared library: libgfx.so
>> py27-exiv2 is missing a required shared library: libexiv2.so.26
>>
>> There was also virtuoso but I deinstalled it assuming it's an old version
>> (the new version doesn't build due to openssl 1.1.0 issue).
>>
>> So now I have two questions: Is it possible to reinstall a package with it's
>> dependencies? And what to do with those broken packages above, should I
>> report a bug?
>
> I don't know for the specific case of the broken packages above, pkg check will
> try to reinstall the missing dependency if any is found. If not, it just report
> the broken packages and one has to figure out why those packages are broken.
>
> I could easily guess for the elinks case. there might be similar reasons for
> other packages.
>
> For example reading at the MOVED file I can easily figure out that py27-exiv2 is
> a package that no longer exists.
>
> For fireflies I don't know, one has to check.


Thanks Bapt.  From what you wrote I infer that an option to reinstall a 
package with all dependencies doesn't exist, e.g.

pkg install -D pkg-name (Force reinstallation of package dependencies if 
already installed)

I will raise a bug for elinks when I am done with upgrading packages.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?09545ba9-fce2-f3ed-f3c7-abedbffe718c>