Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 00:01:36 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Adam McLaurin <adam.mclaurin@gmx.net> Cc: knu@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: portupgrade misbehavior Message-ID: <20040520070136.GA62040@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040520025535.41b274ac.adam.mclaurin@gmx.net> References: <20040520025535.41b274ac.adam.mclaurin@gmx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 20, 2004 at 02:55:35AM -0400, Adam McLaurin wrote: > -# uname -a > FreeBSD jake 5.2.1-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 5.2.1-RELEASE-p4 #0: Tue Mar 30 > 01:07:47 EST 2004 root@jake:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/ESKI i386 >=20 >=20 > Why the h*ll did portupgrade try to recompile zsh? I can't think of any > logical explanation for this behavior. Perhaps I am missing something > simple here; or perhaps I stumbled across a bug in portupgrade (or even > ruby) ? Is your INDEX out of date? portupgrade assumes it is up-to-date and bases its upgrade decisions on the contents. Compare the output of portversion and pkg_version. Kris --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFArFfPWry0BWjoQKURArBYAJ0WKwVDE2MZ7C4Ayj+Owk149joCnACgsv1B VRFec1d4+N3FAruZNn08l40= =te94 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040520070136.GA62040>