Leif Neland wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:23:35PM -0600, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
| ports.
Because it is a package update system
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:10:14PM +, Paul Richards wrote:
The problem is that 'make install' in a port doesn't check dependencies
properly, whereas pkg_install does.
Uh, actually, 'make install' does a better job. pkg_install has no
clue about substitute dependencies.
--
wca
To
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:10:14PM +, Paul Richards wrote:
Leif Neland wrote:
The problem is that 'make install' in a port doesn't check dependencies
properly, whereas pkg_install does.
Is this really true? There are even bsd.port.mk targets you can use to
Will Andrews wrote:
On Wed, Feb 14, 2001 at 03:10:14PM +, Paul Richards wrote:
The problem is that 'make install' in a port doesn't check dependencies
properly, whereas pkg_install does.
Uh, actually, 'make install' does a better job. pkg_install has no
clue about substitute
) goes to great lengths to determine
the actual dependencies of a specific port. You might have better luck
trying to hack an update function into porteasy than using pkg_update.
DES
--
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe fr
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:23:35PM -0600, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
| ports.
Because it is a package update system. If you want to update
from
If memory serves me right, Nik Clayton wrote:
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:23:35PM -0600, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not fro
m
| ports.
Because
On Wed, Feb 07, 2001 at 08:23:35PM -0600, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
| ports.
Because it is a package update system. If you want to update
from
[moved to -ports]
If memory serves me right, "Leif Neland" wrote:
Couldn't it be made possible to use just the update-of-dependencies part of p
kg_update without doing the pkg_delete/pkg_install bit?
Perhaps I'll try...
Manipulating the bits is relatively straightforward. Doing so in a
It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
ports.
Even when I first do a make package, and then try a pkg_update it appears
it does not work correctly, as it wants to uninstall the latest version
before it reinstalls it.
Could pkg_update be a target
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
| ports.
Because it is a package update system. If you want to update
from the ports, use 'pkg_version -c |sh'
| Even when I first do a make package
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, Michael C . Wu wrote:
On Thu, Feb 08, 2001 at 01:56:11AM +0100, Leif Neland scribbled:
| It seems pkg_update is only usable when installing from packages, not from
| ports.
Because it is a package update system. If you want to update
from the ports, use 'pkg_version
Cool!
On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, David O'Brien wrote:
Until Paul Richards fixes the bug, do NOT run `pkg_update' on a package
w/o a version number in the name. Ie, ``pkg_update gtk.tgz'' will delete
every package off your system.
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
GNU is Not Unix
13 matches
Mail list logo
