Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:41:48 +0200
From:      Nikola Lecic <nlecic@EUnet.yu>
To:        Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu>
Cc:        lawrence.petrykanyn@sympatico.ca, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Problem with Gnome2 Installation
Message-ID:  <200708291828.l7TISMpc006817@smtpclu-7.EUnet.yu>
In-Reply-To: <46D5C488.7030909@math.arizona.edu>
References:  <BAY105-F217920D9CDA387270BA5C783CC0@phx.gbl> <46D5C488.7030909@math.arizona.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:10:00 -0700
Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu> wrote:

[...]
> never use with option -a (all)

Why?

[...]
> Recently I upgraded one library by using make deinstall && make
> reinstall (I guess this is little bit stupid because of the
> dependence issues but it could work for some small program)

Why is it stupid and why for small programs? If "dependency issue"
means that you had an outdated library, then that usually simply means
that you had outdated ports tree as a whole. If you update everything,
portupgrade will basically do the same: it will _forcefully_ delete
old package and replace it with the new one, but it will also preserve
everything that is necessary to recreate the old version if updating
eventually fails. And of course, it will do it in a correctly determined
task order.

It's generally wise to be consistent in using a chosen port management
software: if you use portupgrade then always use portupgrade; use
pkg_deinstall (a part of it) to delete -- it will run more basic
commands for you. Use portupgrade -f to forcefully rebuild, etc.

Nikola Le=C4=8Di=C4=87



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200708291828.l7TISMpc006817>