From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 1 14:42:16 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80189106566B for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 14:42:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from david@vizion2000.net) Received: from dns1.vizion2000.net (dns1.vizion2000.net [62.49.197.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC6B88FC15 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 14:42:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by dns1.vizion2000.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 9107A34D404; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 14:42:14 +0000 (GMT) From: David Southwell Organization: Voice & Vision To: Robert Huff Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 14:42:14 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/7.2-RELEASE-p3; KDE/4.5.4; amd64; ; ) References: <201101011209.17387.david@vizion2000.net> <19743.11296.856741.802484@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <19743.11296.856741.802484@jerusalem.litteratus.org> X-KMail-Markup: true MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <201101011442.14507.david@vizion2000.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portupgrade -f advice please X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 01 Jan 2011 14:42:16 -0000 > David Southwell writes: > > A bit puzzled > > > > I have a problem with apache22 loading and decided before doing > > anything else that I would upgrade apache22 recursively to > > rebuild all ports upon which it depened and which depend upon > > apache. > > > > The (to me) logical command was: > > > > dns1# portupgrade -frR apache22 > > > > Which generated the following: > > [Exclude up-to-date packages done] > > > > Man portupgrade shows: > > -f > > > > --force Force the upgrade of a package even if it is > > to be > > > > a downgrade or just a reinstall of the same > > ver- sion, or the port is held by user > > using the HOLD_PKGS variable in > > pkgtools.conf. > > > > I do not want to exclude packages that appear to be > > up-to-date. Where is this limitation on force set? > > Assuming the reoirt if generated output is verbatim, I beleive > this is behaving as you desire. Usually the "Excluding up-to-date > packages" line includes what I believe is one dot per package so > excluded. > I would argue a better notification would be something like: > > 'R' and 'f' options specifed - skipping up-to-date dependency checks. > > > Robert Huff No I am wanting to force an upgrade to all packages irrespective as to whether they are up to date. What is happening is that no packages are being upgraded! The only response I am getting is for portupgrade to skip the upgrade of all packages on the grounds they are "up to date". man portupgrade says -f forces the upgrade of the packages EVEN IF it is a reinstall of the same version. I want all the nominated ports and all the ports affected by -rR to be forced to upgrade. David Photographic Artist Permanent Installations & Design Creative Imagery and Advanced Digital Techniques High Dynamic Range Photography & Official Portraiture Combined darkroom & digital creations & Systems Adminstrator for the vizion2000.net network