On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Ronald Klop <ronald-freeb...@klop.yi.org> wrote: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2012 18:04:33 +0100, Chris Rees <utis...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 11 Dec 2012 16:44, "Alex Dupre" <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Jeremy Messenger ha scritto: >>> >>> >> Absolutely yes from me. The -w option is real lifesaver and should be >>> >> on by default. >>> > >>> > I disagree. The -w is a temp fix and not a correct solution, so it >>> > shouldn't be default. >>> >>> I agree with your disagreement :-) >>> >> >> I get what you're saying, but please consider which is easier to reverse- >> deleting an accidentally saved library, or restoring an accidentally >> deleted library? >> >> Defaults should be safe. I was bitten by this with pcre- sometimes we >> can't update all our ports at one time. >> >> How isn't it correct? We still keep src libraries around until we make >> delete-old-libs. Why should ports be different? >> >> Chris > > > Doesn't the ports framework itself also keep the old libraries around in > /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg or something like that? > The ports framework doesn't keep old libraries. Tools such as portupgrade and portmaster may be configured to keep old libraries when upgrading the port.
-- DISCLAIMER: No electrons were mamed while sending this message. Only slightly bruised. _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
