Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 06 Mar 2011 08:22:32 +0100
From:      Rainer Hurling <rhurlin@gwdg.de>
To:        bf1783@gmail.com
Cc:        freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: [FYI] Fwd: cvs commit: ports UPDATING ports/Mk bsd.python.mk
Message-ID:  <4D733638.5030608@gwdg.de>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikdDJW3eEopFsmPJjEkiTKDNpeEpKOjNHr4tXGJ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <AANLkTikdDJW3eEopFsmPJjEkiTKDNpeEpKOjNHr4tXGJ@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 06.03.2011 00:56 (UTC+1), b. f. wrote:
>>> Does it rebuild all depending packages?
>>
>> And waht is the difference between make upgrade-site-packages and
>> portupgrade -r python?
>
> As I explained earlier on freebsd-python@, unlike 'portupgrade -r
> python', the upgrade-site-packages target just rebuilds ports that
> have files in the library directories belonging to non-default
> versions of python, and ports that in turn depend upon them, not
> necessarily every port that lists python as a dependency.
> upgrade-site-packages is for your convenience, to rebuild a (probably)
> smaller collection of ports that are most likely to need rebuilding
> after a change in default python versions.

Thanks for the explanation. In principle the script works as aspected. 
As far as I can see there remain some ports like graphics/qgis without 
upgrading. QGIS defines USE_PYTHON=yes in its Makefile, but is not 
upgraded. Other examples from my installations are multimedia/xbmc, 
irc/xchat, editors/openoffice.org-3.

pkg_libchk from sysutils/bsdadminscripts identifies most (all?) of them.

Rainer



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D733638.5030608>