Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library?
--- On Mon, 2/18/13, Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com wrote: From: Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library? To: Jeffrey Bouquet jeffreybouq...@yahoo.com Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List freebsd-po...@freebsd.org Date: Monday, February 18, 2013, 1:01 AM On 18 Feb 2013 05:35, Jeffrey Bouquet jeffreybouq...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library? Bernard Higonnet wrote: Is there a simple, direct, complete, and unequivocal way to find out which port(s) install which libraries? Something like this perhaps? # grep libfoobar.so /usr/ports/*/*/pkg-plist AvW None of these replies mention pkg which /usr/local/lib/libfoobar.so pkg_which /usr/local/lib/libfoobar.so ... I typically use one or both (still using /var/db/pkg after running pkg2ng once a long time ago...) Why??? Chris Unsure of the question. Why did I run pkg2ng? I was uncognizant of all the immediate consequences. Why did I revert? Not ready to make /var/db/pkg disappear until I've seen guides explaining the new usages which fit the present workflow here... Why do not I implement it at this time? I've still too much to do in the short term on a daily basis vs. implement anything new until I am one of the *last* to do so, so I would do it in the quickest and most expedient manner. pkg_delete -f /var/db/pkg/rubygem-mime-types-1.19 pkg_add rubygem-mime-types-1.21.tbz. I don't have to know the 1.19 (the shell does). I do not recall anyone mentioning how the equivalent would work in a pkg system. They may have, but if it was a reply, I archived it somewhere, as I would prefer to switch all the machines I use weekly all at once, and prefer to wait as long as expedient. That works on legacy laptops as well as modern 4-core CPU, aided by the shell doing expansion, and I can type it without thinking, aided by the shell. The subdirectory is directly available to grep, awk, less... without an .so. I've not yet had time to implement a /var/db/pkg/ on a machine running pkg (by script maybe) so that it could continue. I've posted several times why the progress of /pkg/ has not been shown to [1] not slow down the workflow to which I am accustomed to upgrade multiple machines has not been reliably demonstrated... and edge cases in which the legacy method is preferable. Unfortunately, I ran out of time a long time ago to respond more in depth; my views on the matter are scattered in the lists archives and forum archives [further content redacted so as to not waste anyone's time.] J. Bouquet [1] I am not asking for anyone's efforts, nor trying to sound negative; just trying to respond to the question with a wait-and-see viewpoint... ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library?
Not answering anyone in particular, but I feel compelled to point out that as far as I know pkg_info only works with packages/ports that are already installed (or at least created/downloaded), whereas the grep/find method also works for finding out which not-yet-installed package/port *will* install a certain file. But do of course correct me if I'm mistaken. AvW -- I'm not completely useless, I can be used as a bad example. pgp2Fpx5d4VfQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library?
On 18 Feb 2013 18:42, Jeffrey Bouquet jeffreybouq...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Mon, 2/18/13, Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com wrote: From: Chris Rees utis...@gmail.com Subject: Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library? To: Jeffrey Bouquet jeffreybouq...@yahoo.com Cc: FreeBSD Mailing List freebsd-po...@freebsd.org Date: Monday, February 18, 2013, 1:01 AM On 18 Feb 2013 05:35, Jeffrey Bouquet jeffreybouq...@yahoo.com wrote: Subject: Re: Is there an easy way to find out which port loads which library? Bernard Higonnet wrote: Is there a simple, direct, complete, and unequivocal way to find out which port(s) install which libraries? Something like this perhaps? # grep libfoobar.so /usr/ports/*/*/pkg-plist AvW None of these replies mention pkg which /usr/local/lib/libfoobar.so pkg_which /usr/local/lib/libfoobar.so ... I typically use one or both (still using /var/db/pkg after running pkg2ng once a long time ago...) Why??? Chris Unsure of the question. Why did I run pkg2ng? I was uncognizant of all the immediate consequences. Why did I revert? Not ready to make /var/db/pkg disappear until I've seen guides explaining the new usages which fit the present workflow here... Why do not I implement it at this time? I've still too much to do in the short term on a daily basis vs. implement anything new until I am one of the *last* to do so, so I would do it in the quickest and most expedient manner. pkg_delete -f /var/db/pkg/rubygem-mime-types-1.19 pkg_add rubygem-mime-types-1.21.tbz. I don't have to know the 1.19 (the shell does). I do not recall anyone mentioning how the equivalent would work in a pkg system. They may have, but if it was a reply, I archived it somewhere, as I would prefer to switch all the machines I use weekly all at once, and prefer to wait as long as expedient. You can use pkg delete -x rubygem-mime-types, or pkg update pkg upgrade is really what you need there. That works on legacy laptops as well as modern 4-core CPU, aided by the shell doing expansion, and I can type it without thinking, aided by the shell. The subdirectory is directly available to grep, awk, less... without an .so. I've not yet had time to implement a /var/db/pkg/ on a machine running pkg (by script maybe) so that it could continue. Man pkg-query, but see below. I've posted several times why the progress of /pkg/ has not been shown to [1] not slow down the workflow to which I am accustomed to upgrade multiple machines has not been reliably demonstrated... and edge cases in which the legacy method is preferable. Unfortunately, I ran out of time a long time ago to respond more in depth; my views on the matter are scattered in the lists archives and forum archives [further content redacted so as to not waste anyone's time.] Shell autocomplete should be pretty easy to implement should you choose, but given that many of the steps you describe are automated anyway, it's hard to see any real advantage to manually manipulating the data! Rather than describing your current methods, you may be better off (in a new thread) describing the *outcomes* that you would like, and we can help you achieve them. Chris ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
