On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 6:22 PM, David Wolfskill wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 05:57:52PM +0100, Alexandre wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> > PORTMASTER 3.1.
> > It is written to do :
> >
> > # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
> >
> > # cd /u
On Sun 2010-10-31 19:27:17 UTC+0100, Michal Varga (varga.mic...@gmail.com)
wrote:
> > UPDATING should probably be amended upstream to correct this...
> >
> > Regards
> > Andrew
>
> While I'm certainly no authority on the issue, I think that's the wrong
> approach and generally (really not speak
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 14:59, Freddie Cash wrote:
> Which is why I mentioned the "more safe" alternative, which you
> snipped out of your reply:
> pkg_delete -xif portmaster
>
> Note the extra "i" in the middle, which makes the pkg_delete call
> interactive, showing the package name to be delete
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 10/31/10 09:57, Alexandre wrote:
| Hi,
|
| I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
| PORTMASTER 3.1.
| It is written to do :
|
| # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
| But when I type the first one, I got the message :
| pkg_d
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Matthew Seaman
wrote:
> On 31/10/2010 17:56, Freddie Cash wrote:
>> The correct command is: pkg_delete -xf portmaster
>>
>> -x does name globbing internally to pkg_delete, and should be used
>> over any shell globbing (like *).
>
> So dogmatic. '-x' is one alter
On 31/10/2010 17:56, Freddie Cash wrote:
> The correct command is: pkg_delete -xf portmaster
>
> -x does name globbing internally to pkg_delete, and should be used
> over any shell globbing (like *).
>
So dogmatic. '-x' is one alternative. A globbing expression is
another. Either can be usef
On Mon, 2010-11-01 at 04:18 +1100, andrew clarke wrote:
>
> UPDATING should probably be amended upstream to correct this...
>
> Regards
> Andrew
While I'm certainly no authority on the issue, I think that's the wrong
approach and generally (really not speaking about any specific case) -
people,
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Alexandre wrote:
> I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> PORTMASTER 3.1.
> It is written to do :
>
> # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
>
> # cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portmaster && make clean && make install clean
>
> But when I type the fi
Op 31-10-2010 17:57, Alexandre schreef:
> Hi,
>
> I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> PORTMASTER 3.1.
> It is written to do :
>
> # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
>
> # cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portmaster && make clean && make install clean
>
> But when I type the f
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 05:57:52PM +0100, Alexandre wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> PORTMASTER 3.1.
> It is written to do :
>
> # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
>
> # cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portmaster && make clean && make install clean
>
> Bu
On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 17:57 +0100, Alexandre wrote:
> I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> PORTMASTER 3.1.
> It is written to do :
>
> # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
The wildcard ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wildcard_character ) is
interpreted by your shell and exp
On Sun 2010-10-31 17:57:52 UTC+0100, Alexandre (axel...@ymail.com) wrote:
> I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
> PORTMASTER 3.1.
> It is written to do :
>
> # pkg_delete -f portmaster*
>
> # cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portmaster && make clean && make install clean
Hi,
I read in /usr/ports/UPGRADING the instructions to properly upgrade
PORTMASTER 3.1.
It is written to do :
# pkg_delete -f portmaster*
# cd /usr/ports/ports-mgmt/portmaster && make clean && make install clean
But when I type the first one, I got the message :
pkg_delete: No match.
Portmaste
13 matches
Mail list logo
