Peter Jeremy wrote:
On 2007-Jun-16 20:44:53 -0700, Stephen Hurd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Agreed, but this situation is not easy to detect with the automated
ports checks that are in place.
Impossible even since we're not using automated tools.
I was thinking of pointyhat
The scenario is installing something *not* from ports which relies on a
port which was installed as a dependency then removing the port that
required the dependency. The proposed feature would remove the
dependency also.
Of course, simply not automatically deinstalling SDL would help out quite a
bit. If I decide to remove SDL, all the results of that are my fault. If
removing portXXX also removes SDL, I can blame the ports system for removing
stuff out from under me.
A normal 'pkg_delete' will not remove any ports other than those
specified and will only remove the port(s) specified iff those ports
have no other ports depending on them. If portXYZ registers a
dependency on SDL then it will not be possible to remove SDL without
disabling the dependency check (via '-f'). The problematic scenario
is where the GNU configure script (or equivalent) for portXYZ senses
the presence of SDL and decides to use it even though the port doesn't
list SDL as a dependency.
Two things....
1) The suggestion is that pkg_delete SHOULD remove dependencies with no
other dependencies marked.
2) The scenario I used was not a port, but a 3rd party piece of software.
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
