Re: Portupgrade Broke?

From: Bob Perry (rperry4_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 08/10/03

  • Next message: Kent Stewart: "Re: Portupgrade Broke?" 
    Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 10:55:57 -0400
To: Khairil Yusof <kaeru@pd.jaring.my>

    Khairil Yusof wrote:

    >On Sat, 2003-08-09 at 22:07, Bob Perry wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I run FreeBSD 4.7 RELEASE. Just ran the portversion command for the
    >>first time since last Saturday and the ouptut indicated that my
    >>installed packages were up-to-date. Thought it odd so I ran pkg_version
    >>command and picked up 9 packages in need up upgrade and several
    >>"orphaned" packages listed. Is there a known problem with the
    >>portupgrade system or was there some warning I missed previously?
    >>
    >>
    >
    >If I'm not wrong, portversion/pkg_version relies on ports index (man 8
    >portupgrade) which needs to be up to date in order for portversion to be
    >accurate. This is not done on a daily basis for the ports tree (as it
    >takes some time).
    >
    >What you should try to do is check that your pkgdb is ok and fix any
    >problems:
    >
    >#pkgdb -F
    >
    >then update the ports index (which takes a while)
    >
    >#portsdb -Uu
    >
    >Then run your portversion/pkg_version which should give more accurate
    >results.
    >
    >Hope this helps.
    >
    >
    First, thanks for taking the time to respond.

    Yesterday, I brought all of my packages up-to-date, ran pkgdb -F,
    followed by portsdb -Uu
    and rhe output from both portversion and pkg_version matched. I slept well.

    This morning, portversion indicated that all packages were current but
    pkg_version showed
    p5-Date-Manip-5.40 needed to be upgraded to 5.42. I ran portupgrade
    expecting to receive a
    message indicating that the package was current, but instead, it
    fetched, built, installed,
    p5-Date-Manip-5.42 and I thought, removed p5-Date-Manip-5.40.

    I ran portversion again and it indicates that "p5-Date-Manip-5.42 >
    succeeds port (port has 5.40)".
    Pkg_version shows p5-Date-Manip-5.42 is up-to-date with port.

    Looks as though the portversion program may not be reading the port tree
    accurately (?).

    I'll have to do more investigation. Maybe I broke something. Thanks again.

    Bob
     

    _______________________________________________
    freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
    http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
    To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"

  • Next message: Kent Stewart: "Re: Portupgrade Broke?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: portversion vs pkg_version
      ... > base install. ... portversion uses the INDEX file to look up port versions. ... INDEX file with portsdb -uU, but this can take a long time depending ...
      (comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc)
    • Re: Portsnap support on CURRENT
      ... portversion (from the portupgrade port) to list which of my packages are ... These messages are incorrect (i.e., ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: Obsolete packages
      ... A new version of a port was released on April 14. ... # portversion -v firefox ... But packages still are of previous version: ...
      (freebsd-questions)
    • Re: Portsnap support on CURRENT
      ... portversion to list which of my packages ... Investigation of the portsnap source ... to generate INDEX-7: ...
      (freebsd-current)
    • Re: Portsnap support on CURRENT
      ... the "port has" version identified by portversion is older than ... it only actually generates INDEX, INDEX-5, and INDEX-6 from portsnap ... updates in extract_indices; it doesn't generate INDEX-7. ...
      (freebsd-current)