On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Chris H wrote:
But it installed (pulled in) far more than those dependencies actually required.
It may bring in build dependencies, but should be no different than
manually installing ports.
I believe, due to the fact that it doesn't appear to honor the original build
options recorded in /var/db/ports/<portname>/options. Nor, do I recall that it
honored /etc/make.conf -- make.conf(5). Maybe things have changed?
Both portupgrade and portmaster did and do honor these. Both are
automated versions of installing the ports manually. That can be
overridden with mis-recommended BATCH variable. Don't do that.
I don't see it. Oh, and should it not have been clear; I _do_
anticipate the "upgrade" to re-build most everything, as that is why
I'm trying to find a "mass upgrader" port, to do the "dirty work".
Also should it not have been clear in the beginning; I am _not_ doing
anything more than upgrading everything _within_ my current version;
eg; no major point upgrade, or anything.
Okay, look up the last time you installed or upgraded a port:
% ls -ltr /var/db/pkg
The last one is the most recently modified. Update your ports tree,
follow all the steps that apply to your system since that date. If any
ports are left to upgrade at the end, use either port upgrade program
with "-a".
I recommend portmaster. It does almost everything portupgrade does, but
without the overhead of Ruby or bdb.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
