t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > To:
> > > Cc: "Paul Schmehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 3:42 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Updated perl - broke stuff
> > >
> > > > I stopped using portupgrade because it only
AIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 3:42 PM
> > Subject: Re: Updated perl - broke stuff
> >
> > > I stopped using portupgrade because it only upgrades ports that are
> > > out-of date. It then modifies the installed software database to
>
On 14 Feb Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 12:24:07PM +0100, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
> > Meaning I don't run this update script when updating perl from say
> > "5.8.5" to "5.8.6" ?
>
> No, that what I meant by "when updating from an older version". When
> perl changes from e.g. 5.8.6
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 12:24:07PM +0100, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
> On 13 Feb Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 08:35:06PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> > > --On Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:18 PM -0500 Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL
> > > PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Did you read /u
On 13 Feb Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 08:35:06PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> > --On Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:18 PM -0500 Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >Did you read /usr/ports/UPDATING? It contains a suggestion for how to
> > >update the Perl po
On Monday 14 February 2005 01:09 am, you wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 12:37:28AM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> > portupgrade -rf forces the rebuild of the port and ALL of its
> > dependencies, and it builds them in the wrong order, it is nothing
> > like portmanager.
> >
> > example:
> >
>
On Mon, Feb 14, 2005 at 12:37:28AM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> portupgrade -rf forces the rebuild of the port and ALL of its
> dependencies, and it builds them in the wrong order, it is nothing
> like portmanager.
>
> example:
>
> if the following are installed:
>
> masterPort-0.0
> de
On Sunday 13 February 2005 06:34 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:15:18PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> > Pkgdb -F is what screws up the installed ports registry. Here is an
> > example of what happens:
> >
> > 1. port-A needs dependency port-B installed
> > 2. port-B is in
On Sunday 13 February 2005 06:37 pm, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:15 PM -0800 "Michael C. Shultz"
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Pkgdb -F is what screws up the installed ports registry. Here is an
> > example of what happens:
> >
> > 1. port-A needs dependency port-B i
On Sunday 13 February 2005 06:34 pm, you wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:15:18PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> > Pkgdb -F is what screws up the installed ports registry. Here is an
> > example of what happens:
> >
> > 1. port-A needs dependency port-B installed
> > 2. port-B is installed
>
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 08:35:06PM -0600, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> --On Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:18 PM -0500 Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >Did you read /usr/ports/UPDATING? It contains a suggestion for how to
> >update the Perl ports which might have helped...
> >
> Well, no.
--On Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:15 PM -0800 "Michael C. Shultz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Pkgdb -F is what screws up the installed ports registry. Here is an
example of what happens:
1. port-A needs dependency port-B installed
2. port-B is installed
3. port-A is installed and marks its registry
--On Sunday, February 13, 2005 5:18 PM -0500 Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Did you read /usr/ports/UPDATING? It contains a suggestion for how to
update the Perl ports which might have helped...
Well, no. Why on earth would I do *that*? ;-)
(Thanks for the tip. I ran it.) I wonder wh
On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 06:15:18PM -0800, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
> Pkgdb -F is what screws up the installed ports registry. Here is an
> example of what happens:
>
> 1. port-A needs dependency port-B installed
> 2. port-B is installed
> 3. port-A is installed and marks its registry as being de
On Sunday 13 February 2005 02:02 pm, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> - Original Message -
> From: "Ean Kingston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Cc: "Paul Schmehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 3:42 PM
> Subject: Re: Updated pe
Piggy-backing on the Subject: line
I recently upgraded perl per the entry in /usr/ports/UPDATING.
Afterwards, gtk-gnutalla is broken. Run from the command line,
I get a whole slew of messages like this:
05/02/13 17:19:58 (WARNING): hostiles.txt, line 243: rejected e
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I maintain a small hobby website on a volunteer basis. (I do all the
technical stuff - server maintenance, etc.) I ran portupgrade today,
and there was an update to perl. (I'm using the ports perl.) It broke
the webserver. I had to deinstall and reinstall www/p5-libwww,
- Original Message -
From: "Ean Kingston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Cc: "Paul Schmehl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 3:42 PM
Subject: Re: Updated perl - broke stuff
I stopped using portupgrade because it only upgrades ports that are o
Paul Schmehl wrote:
I maintain a small hobby website on a volunteer basis. (I do all the
technical stuff - server maintenance, etc.) I ran portupgrade today,
and there was an update to perl. (I'm using the ports perl.) It broke
the webserver. I had to deinstall and reinstall www/p5-libwww,
On February 13, 2005 04:37 pm, Paul Schmehl wrote:
> I maintain a small hobby website on a volunteer basis. (I do all the
> technical stuff - server maintenance, etc.) I ran portupgrade today, and
> there was an update to perl. (I'm using the ports perl.) It broke the
> webserver. I had to dei
I maintain a small hobby website on a volunteer basis. (I do all the
technical stuff - server maintenance, etc.) I ran portupgrade today, and
there was an update to perl. (I'm using the ports perl.) It broke the
webserver. I had to deinstall and reinstall www/p5-libwww, www/mod_perl and
ww
21 matches
Mail list logo
