On 14/09/15 15:49, Artur Szostak wrote:
Then why not protect all other upgrade operations with a -f | --force flag, except when upgrading everything? It seems much too easy at the moment to perform an upgrade operation that has a good chance of leading to an inconsistent state.
no it will not. A normal upgrade will first upgrade all the ports dependencies, as required, such that you end up with a consistent updated port. Only if you specifically disable this can you get into a mess.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Brandon Allbery [allber...@gmail.com] *Sent:* 14 September 2015 16:32 *To:* Artur Szostak *Cc:* Macports Users [macports-users@lists.macosforge *Subject:* Re: Versions in ports On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Artur Szostak <aszos...@partner.eso.org <mailto:aszos...@partner.eso.org>> wrote: To me, it feels like the MacPorts documentation is misleading the end user to believe that upgrading/downgrading individual packages is a routine and safe procedure, when my experience tells me otherwise. Can anyone point me to the reason behind these design decisions? I suspect you are reading experience with something like yum or apt-get into a ports-based system. MacPorts gets most of its behavior from BSD ports/pkgsrc, and the documentation tends to assume that you are familiar with that. -- brandon s allbery kf8nh sine nomine associates allber...@gmail.com <mailto:allber...@gmail.com> ballb...@sinenomine.net <mailto:ballb...@sinenomine.net> unix, openafs, kerberos, infrastructure, xmonad http://sinenomine.net _______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
_______________________________________________ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
