> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-m...@openbsd.org [mailto:owner-m...@openbsd.org] On Behalf > Of Stuart Henderson > Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2019 7:59 AM > To: misc@openbsd.org > Subject: Re: Following current - pkg_add update forward depedencies > don't match question > > On 2019-11-02, Theodore Wynnychenko <t...@uchicago.edu> wrote: > > I decided to just try updating gettext, so (this is the full output > on that > > system): > > Well, that's the problem. Partial updates work sometimes but they can't > be relied upon, in particular won't work around some types of > restructuring > changes as happened to the gettext port. >
I tried running 'pkg_add -u' (not as a partial update) probably 5-10 times, always getting the same 'forward dependencies don't match' notice, and pkg_add ending with the notices: Couldn't find updates for ... gettext-0.19.8.1p3 ... (and all the other 'don't match' packages) Couldn't install gettext-runtime-0.20.1p0 ... (and all the other 'don't match' packages) > Flavours are after the version number (mutt-1.12.2v3-gpgme: this is the > "gpgme" flavour of mutt). > > gettext was split into multiple parts (runtime, tools, and > libtextstyle) > in separate packages and there is no more package just named "gettext". > Say you have A+B installed and want to update them, both use gettext. > A(old)+B(old) depend on gettext; A(new)+B(new) depend on gettext- > runtime. > gettext and gettext-runtime contain same files so can't be installed > together. Therefore you can't update A(old) to A(new) without also > updating B(old) to B(new). > In my case, pkg_add -u did not succeed regardless of whether or not it was a complete update. > > Now, I really have little idea of what this means, or what I am > doing, but I > > decided I would just manually "fix" the @depend line in my local > > "/var/db/pkg/[package]/+CONTENTS" to the "new" line (with > > "gettext-runtime-0.20.1p0" in it). > > That probably didn't cause any big problems in this case, but I just > want > to make sure that it's showing in the thread for the list archives: > don't > do that :-) > I agree that it did not seem like the best idea (a little knowledge is a dangerous thing). When I was thinking about it, I thought of deleting gettext (so that I could install gettext-runtime), but that seemed to lead to a lot of other required package deletions, and I was worried that something would break. I could not figure out how to get one package (in this case, getext) to be deleted, for just a few minutes, so that I could install gettext-runtime without being forced to accept the deletion of a bunch of other packages. Is there a way to do something like that? I could not find one. > I would suggest running pkg_check now for a sanity check of the package > database. > Did that immediately after the update - I guess I got something right :-) Thanks again Ted
