I got no responses when I posted this a few days ago, so I'm reposting
it now. I'd really like to finish the perl upgrade process, so I could move
on to installing/updating other ports safely, but could use some advice.
Thanks for sending me your response directly. The digest including your
response has yet to appear.
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:41:49 -0700 Kent Stewart
wrote:
>On Monday 15 June 2009 08:25:59 pm you wrote:
>> I got no responses when I posted this a few days ago, so I'm reposting
>> it
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:25:59PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> I got no responses when I posted this a few days ago, so I'm reposting
> it now. I'd really like to finish the perl upgrade process, so I could move
> on to installing/updating other ports safely, but could use some advice.
>
===>>> No ORIGIN in /var/db/pkg/perl-threaded-5.10.0_3/+CONTENTS:@comment
ORIGIN:lang/perl5.10 /var/db/pkg/perltidy-20071205/+CONTENTS:@comment
ORIGIN:devel/perltidy/+CONTENTS
===>>> Aborting update
Looks something in your /var/db/pkg got corrupted. Fix it or forcibly remove
perltidy and rebui
Scott Bennett wrote:
> I got no responses when I posted this a few days ago, so I'm reposting
> it now. I'd really like to finish the perl upgrade process, so I could move
> on to installing/updating other ports safely, but could use some advice.
>-
On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:07:26 +0200 Alexey Shuvaev
wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:25:59PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
>> I got no responses when I posted this a few days ago, so I'm reposting
>> it now. I'd really like to finish the perl upgrade process, so I could move
>> on to inst
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:44:54PM -0500, Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 20:07:26 +0200 Alexey Shuvaev
> wrote:
> >Hmmm... Looking at portmaster sources I've got one idea.
> >Can you try more precise command to upgrade everything depending on perl?
> >
> >nice +18 portmaster -v -r
Jim Trigg wrote:
> Actually, he was suggesting changing from perl\* to perl-\* so it would
> only match the perl port.
FYI, the \* at the end is not needed, 'portmaster perl-' will work
just fine.
> Unfortunately, that won't work as there is at
> least one other port that will match that -- net/
On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:42:51 -0700 Doug Barton
wrote:
>Jim Trigg wrote:
>> Actually, he was suggesting changing from perl\* to perl-\* so it would
>> only match the perl port.
>
>FYI, the \* at the end is not needed, 'portmaster perl-' will work
>just fine.
>
>> Unfortunately, that won't wor
В Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:12:17 -0500 (CDT)
Scott Bennett пишет:
SB> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:42:51 -0700 Doug Barton
SB> wrote:
SB> >Jim Trigg wrote:
SB> >> Actually, he was suggesting changing from perl\* to perl-\* so
SB> >> it would only match the perl port.
SB> >
SB> >FYI, the \* at the end
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:12:17 -0500 (CDT)
Scott Bennett wrote:
> If someone can tell me how to proceed from here, I'll give it
> another try. However, once again the ports subsystem is testing my
> tolerance for frustration, so if there's no real hope of completing
> the entire rebuilding pr
Scott Bennett wrote:
> Thank you for doing that. Unfortunately, it might have been more
> appropriate to have simply replaced that note with another that cautions
> anyone attempting the perl upgrade that the upgrade has not been fully
> tested against all ports that may list the new perl as
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:30:11 -0700 Doug Barton
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> Thank you for doing that. Unfortunately, it might have been more
>> appropriate to have simply replaced that note with another that cautions
>> anyone attempting the perl upgrade that the upgrade has not been
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:31:36 +0300 "Sergey V. Dyatko"
wrote:
>÷ Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:12:17 -0500 (CDT)
>Scott Bennett ÐÉÛÅÔ:
>
>SB> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:42:51 -0700 Doug Barton
>SB> wrote:
>SB> >Jim Trigg wrote:
>SB> >> Actually, he was suggesting changing from perl\* to perl-\* so
>S
Scott Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:30:11 -0700 Doug Barton
> wrote:
> There ought to be an automated way to deal with the package issue that
> causes the failure of the entire update run just because it wants a human
> to type "make deinstall && make reinstall".
Sorry I wasn'
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:48:45 -0700 Doug Barton
wrote:
>Scott Bennett wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:30:11 -0700 Doug Barton
>> wrote:
>> There ought to be an automated way to deal with the package issue that
>> causes the failure of the entire update run just because it wants a h
Scott Bennett writes:
> The first is, which is the best tool for doing updates
> with a preference for using packages rather than rebuilds of ports (a la
> "portupgrade -aP")?
You may take a look at sysutils/bsdadminscripts which use pkg_upgrade
to manage packages.
WBR
--
bsam
___
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:45:32 +0400 Boris Samorodov
wrote:
>Scott Bennett writes:
>
>> The first is, which is the best tool for doing updates
>> with a preference for using packages rather than rebuilds of ports (a la
>> "portupgrade -aP")?
>
>You may take a look at sysutils/bsdadminscripts w
18 matches
Mail list logo
