Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 19:39:41 -0700 From: Rob Farmer <rfarmer@predatorlabs.net> To: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Ports Mailing List <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Portmaster 3.1 upgrade Message-ID: <AANLkTik3vcAsw7gY5Nop_7=xO%2BMquRtRY227_2mXt6gP@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik_OrT7oN20RYQ3B9E5TFRfSHq8-o5dAPC=KQf5@mail.gmail.com> References: <AANLkTimKKVeR_EsoDQv_3r%2B8hdh%2Ba9K_bAxWx4qi_cgW@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTim75-0AoGuTaptR5MRChbXWFpe0kgmXieKFxY6X@mail.gmail.com> <4CCDBC20.10102@infracaninophile.co.uk> <AANLkTik_OrT7oN20RYQ3B9E5TFRfSHq8-o5dAPC=KQf5@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 14:59, Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> wrote: > Which is why I mentioned the "more safe" alternative, which you > snipped out of your reply: > =A0pkg_delete -xif portmaster > > Note the extra "i" in the middle, which makes the pkg_delete call > interactive, showing the package name to be deleted, and asking the > user whether that's the correct package to be deleted. In the same vein, why suggest -f ? Looking at the man page, it seems multiple packages can be listed (ie pkg_delete -f portmaster \*) so if someone mistypes, it greatly increases the damage. I don't think anything depends on portmaster so its not really necessary. --=20 Rob Farmer
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AANLkTik3vcAsw7gY5Nop_7=xO%2BMquRtRY227_2mXt6gP>