Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Joshua Root
Scott Haneda wrote: > Why can't the wireshark port and similar ports have a > "requires-depends-rebuild" defaulting to false. > > The port file could set it to true as needed. Some other "magic" could > happen in the mac ports base to figure out if it needs special treatment. In this example, w

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Joshua Root
Scott C. Kennedy wrote: > Okay, maybe I'm being a bit stupid here, but if I had I compiled > wireshark several months ago, and it required libpcap, however the port > for wireshark was upgraded BEFORE the port for libpcap... So, if I don't > rebuild wireshark AFTER the libpcap upgrade I would have

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Scott Haneda
Why can't the wireshark port and similar ports have a "requires- depends-rebuild" defaulting to false. The port file could set it to true as needed. Some other "magic" could happen in the mac ports base to figure out if it needs special treatment. If no other ports are registered to depend

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Tony Doan
Jeremy, In many cases your commands probably work fine. Partly I started this before port uninstall inactive worked. Previously if you had two versions of libiconv you couldn't uninstall the older one. But I've also found many cases were port upgrade leaves me with multiple broken ports.

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Scott C. Kennedy
Okay, maybe I'm being a bit stupid here, but if I had I compiled wireshark several months ago, and it required libpcap, however the port for wireshark was upgraded BEFORE the port for libpcap... So, if I don't rebuild wireshark AFTER the libpcap upgrade I would have a problem like "The wireshark p

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Bryan Blackburn
On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 04:28:46PM -0700, Scott C. Kennedy said: > Well, for me, when I used to do that, I would lose all my variants. 'port upgrade' is supposed to keep all variants intact, though there is/was a definte bug with it, fixed on trunk: If that

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Scott C. Kennedy
As an example, this was my update for today... Biko:~ sck$ port_upgrade -o ./port_upgrade.sh Searching for unzip's Portfile Outdated(4): coreutils(7.2_0) < 7.4_0 docbook-xsl(1.74.3_0) < 1.75.0_0 gsed(4.1.5_4) < 4.2_0 pcre(7.8_3) < 7.9_0 14 ports to remove: apac

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Scott C. Kennedy
Well, for me, when I used to do that, I would lose all my variants. Plus, when a dependency for a package changed significantly, then the program would terminate or act unexpectedly. For me, a longer compile time when updating packages to ensure that all my packages are linked to the most recent ve

Re: port upgrade outdated

2009-05-09 Thread Bryan Blackburn
On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 05:58:04PM -0500, Ryan Schmidt said: [...] > > Rather than trying to find solutions for individual ports like this, we > should come up with a global solution for renaming / superseding / > deprecating ports and implement it in base. There is a pseudo-portname, obsolete,

Re: Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Jeremy Huddleston
On May 9, 2009, at 14:05, Tony Doan wrote: (long time lurker, first time poster) Got MacPorts? Do you normally keep things up to date by running "port sync; port upgrade outdated"? Do you then wish there was a problem free way to clean out all the previous versions? How is this differen

Re: port upgrade outdated

2009-05-09 Thread Ryan Schmidt
On May 2, 2009, at 11:51, Thomas De Contes wrote: Le 26 avr. 09 à 17:59, Rainer Müller a écrit : Thomas De Contes wrote: ---> Activating xorg-renderproto @0.9.3_0 Error: Target org.macports.activate returned: Image error: /Users/ thomas/Documents/prgm/bin/autoinstall/macports/include/X11/

Re: port upgrade outdated

2009-05-09 Thread nox
Le 27 avr. 09 à 02:06, Ryan Schmidt a écrit : On Apr 26, 2009, at 18:09, Rainer Müller wrote: Rainer Müller wrote: Thomas De Contes wrote: ---> Staging atk into destroot [...] /bin/sh: line 1: gtkdoc-rebase: command not found make[2]: *** [install-data-local] Error 127 make[1]: *** [install

Announcing: port_upgrade

2009-05-09 Thread Tony Doan
(long time lurker, first time poster) Got MacPorts? Do you normally keep things up to date by running "port sync; port upgrade outdated"? Do you then wish there was a problem free way to clean out all the previous versions? Well then... have I got some beta software for you! port_upgrade

Re: making ruby19 main ruby

2009-05-09 Thread C. Florian Ebeling
On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 3:28 AM, Alexy Khrabrov wrote: > How do I make the ruby1.9 from the port ruby19 my main ruby? You can install ruby 1.9 with the command sudo port install ruby19+nosuffix and then the executables will not be suffixed with the version. That makes this port conflict then w