On Sunday 04 April 2004 01:10 pm, Jay Moore wrote:
> On Sunday 04 April 2004 02:27 pm, Kent Stewart wrote:
> > > Bottom line here (in my case) is this: I'm afraid my ports tree
> > > may be BFU; this all started when I tried to install the "K3b"
> > > port which apparently has a bazillion dependencies. At least one
> > > of the tar.gz files couldn't be located, and things have kind of
> > > gone downhill from there :(    For me, I'm afraid that salvation
> > > may require "wiping" the entire ports tree, and re-installing it
> > > from the 5.2 cd.   Is there a safe & clean way  to do that?
> >
> > It was the closest thing to openssl. There is what I think is a
> > problem with ports such as openssl. It is in the makefile to
> > portupgrade but if you do a make search, it doesn't show up. When
> > you see an obvious link problem like you saw, check if you have it
> > installed. If you do/don't just upgrade/install what is missing.
> Well, done is done... no way I can "back up", and re-visit questions
> that I've already answered incorrectly. And meanwhile my machine is
> still crunching forward with the last "portupgrade -a" that I did -
> this will likely continue for quite some time as it reports 211 ports
> (and this # keeps growing!) I believe I've lost control of the f**g
> thing...
> So - is there a way to go back to "ground zero"?... to just remove
> everything from the ports tree, and re-install from the 5.2 cd?

Why would you want to go back. I think that is comparable to rejecting 
brain surgery and asking them to reinsert a tumor. There are problems 
that occur and you can't always blindly run portupgrade -a. Most of the 
time, the fix is really simple and you fix it and move on.


Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to