On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 12:25:05 +0300
Sergey Matveychuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Randy Pratt wrote:
Unfortunately I can't reproduce it.
Can you show an output of the command please: cd
/usr/ports/multimedia/kino; make package-depends-list
(doesn't this ignore any entries in
On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:15:18 +0300
Sergey Matveychuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it should be fixed in 2.2.5 version.
Yes, it certainly seems so. It may be a bit premature without
further testing but it works as I have come to expect portupgrade
to work.
Just after I updated this
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 19:36:19 +0300
Sergey Matveychuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Randy Pratt wrote:
There seems to be some problem in the way that portupgrade handles
dependencies in updating a port to a new version. In quite a few
cases, portupgrade does not
Randy Pratt wrote:
Before starting, I had no DELETED comments in /var/db/pkg/*/+CONTENTS.
After following the above steps, I checked for DELETED comments:
ImageMagick-6.3.2.0_1/+CONTENTS:@comment DELETED:pkgdep
ghostscript-afpl-8.54,1
ImageMagick-6.3.2.0_1/+CONTENTS:@comment
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
# grep mplayer /var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/*
/var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/+CONTENTS:@pkgdep mplayer-skins-1.1.2_6
/var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/+CONTENTS:@comment DEPORIGIN:multimedia/mplayer-skins
/var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/+CONTENTS:@comment DELETED:pkgdep mplayer-0.99.10_4
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007 21:51:48 +0300
Sergey Matveychuk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
# grep mplayer /var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/*
/var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/+CONTENTS:@pkgdep mplayer-skins-1.1.2_6
/var/db/pkg/kino-0.9.5/+CONTENTS:@comment
DEPORIGIN:multimedia/mplayer-skins
Sergey Matveychuk wrote:
Randy Pratt wrote:
There seems to be some problem in the way that portupgrade handles
dependencies in updating a port to a new version. In quite a few
cases, portupgrade does not restore all dependencies that were
originally listed in the +REQUIRED_BY file. I'll use
I have observed this behavior also, and agree that portupgrade seems
to have a bug.
On 20-Jan-2007 I installed 6.2-RELEASE on an empty hard disk partition
with ports skeletons. Using make under /usr/ports I built some 340
ports over a 2 day span.
Six days later I cvsup'd the latest ports
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007 00:11:14 -0500
Randy Pratt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There seems to be some problem in the way that portupgrade
handles dependencies in updating a port to a new version.
In quite a few cases, portupgrade does not restore all
dependencies that were originally listed in the
There seems to be some problem in the way that portupgrade handles
dependencies in updating a port to a new version. In quite a few
cases, portupgrade does not restore all dependencies that were
originally listed in the +REQUIRED_BY file. I'll use the netpbm
as an example:
Before updating
10 matches
Mail list logo