Csaba Henk wrote:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 11:19:03AM -0500, Eric Schuele wrote:
Csaba Henk wrote:
Because all such scripts are fundamentally broken.
When make decides which ports to pull in, it doesn't only use the flat
data of build and run dependencies, but uses its full Turing complete
co
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 11:19:03AM -0500, Eric Schuele wrote:
> Csaba Henk wrote:
> >Because all such scripts are fundamentally broken.
> >
> >When make decides which ports to pull in, it doesn't only use the flat
> >data of build and run dependencies, but uses its full Turing complete
> >computing
Csaba Henk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:55:28AM -0500, Eric Schuele wrote:
Hello,
Some time back I posted a question regarding how to determine what
ports/packages would need to be installed on my machine when I install a
new (new to the local machine) port.
For example, if I do not pr
On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 11:55:28AM -0500, Eric Schuele wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Some time back I posted a question regarding how to determine what
> ports/packages would need to be installed on my machine when I install a
> new (new to the local machine) port.
>
> For example, if I do not presently h
hmm... apologies on the poor formating.
Eric Schuele wrote:
Hello,
Some time back I posted a question regarding how to determine what
ports/packages would need to be installed on my machine when I install a
new (new to the local machine) port.
For example, if I do not presently have openoffi
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 9:42 AM -0500 5/2/05, Eric Schuele wrote:
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
I believe that 'portupgrade -n' only works right for ports which
you have already installed.
Yes... That is the conclusion I have come to.
I'm sure what I am trying to accomplish is just one savvy shell
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Garance A Drosihn
> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 10:14 AM
> To: Eric Schuele
> Cc: FreeBSD Questions
> Subject: Re: Determining what a port will install... (more
> than pr
At 9:42 AM -0500 5/2/05, Eric Schuele wrote:
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
I believe that 'portupgrade -n' only works right for ports which
you have already installed.
Yes... That is the conclusion I have come to.
I'm sure what I am trying to accomplish is just one savvy shell
script away I'm just n
Garance A Drosihn wrote:
At 4:25 PM -0500 4/30/05, Eric Schuele wrote:
Philip Hallstrom wrote:
The "portupgrade" port can do this. Something like...
portupgrade -n -Rr someport
The -n tells it not to do anything, just show you what it would do.
This sounds like what I'm looking for... so I tried
At 4:25 PM -0500 4/30/05, Eric Schuele wrote:
Philip Hallstrom wrote:
The "portupgrade" port can do this. Something like...
portupgrade -n -Rr someport
The -n tells it not to do anything, just show you what it would do.
This sounds like what I'm looking for... so I tried it. But its giving
me dif
Philip Hallstrom wrote:
Is there a way to determine exactly what a particular port will install on
my machine?
Doing a `make pretty-print-run-depends-list` will show me all of its
requirements... but I am interested in the difference between its
requirements and what I already have on my machin
Philip Hallstrom wrote:
Is there a way to determine exactly what a particular port will
install on my machine?
Doing a `make pretty-print-run-depends-list` will show me all of its
requirements... but I am interested in the difference between its
requirements and what I already have on my machin
Is there a way to determine exactly what a particular port will install on my
machine?
Doing a `make pretty-print-run-depends-list` will show me all of its
requirements... but I am interested in the difference between its
requirements and what I already have on my machine. If I have 7 out of t
13 matches
Mail list logo