On 1/14/2013 2:48 PM, Chris Rees wrote: > On 14 January 2013 19:27, Eitan Adler <li...@eitanadler.com> wrote: >> On 14 January 2013 14:04, Vick Khera <vi...@khera.org> wrote: >>> My apologies. I use portmaster. I don't know why I typed portupgrade in that >>> original message. Looking at the history file from my shell I see >>> "portmaster -o textproc/ack p5-ack-1.96_1" was used to correct the fact that >>> p5-ack was leftover after a "portmaster -a" run. >>> >>> I agree duplicating the info in UPDATING would be unnecessary. I did not >>> have it in my procedures to look into MOVING. I will do that from now on. >> >> This should not be required. MOVING is designed for machines to read, >> not humans. IMHO portmaster should remove the old version (at least >> if given an appropriate flag). > > I'm certain it does... Vick, if you can reproduce this error, please > file a PR against portmaster; this is a bug! > > Chris
This bug was reported to me for this exact port already. It's being tracked here: https://github.com/portmaster/portmaster/issues/15 Regards, Bryan Drewery
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
