Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 10:41:11 -0700 From: Clint Olsen <clint@0lsen.net> To: Jens Rehsack <rehsack@liwing.de> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Trashed my machine via ports Message-ID: <20031003174111.GA1221@0lsen.net> In-Reply-To: <3F7DA5C8.4030907@liwing.de> References: <20031003093906.3C6715CF@0lsen.net> <3F7D4E01.8010806@liwing.de> <oprwg6tq0u8ckrg5@smtp.central.cox.net> <3F7DA5C8.4030907@liwing.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Oct 03, Jens Rehsack wrote:
>
> If you see at the rest of the thread (subject changed), he had neither
> installed nor used portupgrade, so pkgdb -F is mandatory before he can
> continue upgrading.
I ran pkgdb -F and in most cases I chose the default answers (not knowing
a better alternative). It would be nice if the dependency "score"
information was more clear. What exactly am I doing when I'm fixing a
stale dependency? What does "deleting" a dependency mean?
Now I'm in portupgrade, and it's just a ton of fun:
# portupgrade -R -force gettext
..
..
[Updating the pkgdb <format:bdb1_btree> in /var/db/pkg ... - 253 packages
found (-0 +1) . done]
---> Skipping 'converters/libiconv' (libiconv-1.7_1) which has already
done
** The port directory for 'rce' does not exist.
** The following packages were not installed or upgraded (*:skipped /
!:failed)
* converters/libiconv (libiconv-1.7_1)
! rce (gettext-0.12.1) (port directory error)
I used -R for the upward recursion (fix all packages relying on gettext).
I also ran with the force switch because it bitched the first time it ran
into a port that was already installed.
Now, is rce a subdir in a particular package or what? I'm scrolling up
through the gobs of text right now to see what the hell this is all about.
Are ports supposed to get this screwed up or did I just not maintain my
ports area correctly?
-Clint
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031003174111.GA1221>