On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 14:20:59 +0200 Alexander Leidinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting RW <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Sat, 11 Aug 2007 22:58:58 > +0100): > > > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:33:22 -0700 > > Jeremy Chadwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 03:02:53PM +0400, Rakhesh Sasidharan > > > wrote: > > > >> 5. pkg_delete port > > > > > > > > I see. In step 5, "pkg_delete port" wont work if port is > > > > required by others right? So you delete those apps too? Could > > > > be a lot of stuff to uninstall, right? > > > > > > Absolutely correct. That might seem like a nightmare to most > > > people, but to me it's not. > > > > It's not correct, "pkg_delete -f" can force the deletion. I would > > manually upgrade a port like this: > > > > cd /usr/ports/misc/foo > > make ; do the build > > pkg_info -qO misc/foo ; get old package name > > pkg_create -b <old-package-name> ; backup existing package > > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/foo stop ; stop the daemon if needed > > pkg_delete -f <old-package-name> ; force removal > > make install > > At this point your /var/db/pkg/ directory does not reflect reality > anymore, I know, I was just pointing out that it is possible to upgrade a port manually without removing every single package that depends on it. Actually having dependencies package version mismatches needn't cause any significant problems. And massaging them into self-consistency is itself a form of corruption, since you lose information about what was built against what. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
