Lots of core files with latest xscreensaver-gnome

[Kevin Oberman]

> Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 20:14:02 +0100
> From: Stacey Roberts <stacey at vickiandstacey.com>
> Sender: owner-freebsd-gnome at freebsd.org
> 
> 
> --Wo0oCZYLrer5S3Oe
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> 
> Hi Adam,
>    Thanks for the time..,
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Adam Weinberger <adamw at freebsd.org>"
> To: To Stacey Roberts
> Date: Mon, 03 May, 2004 19:45 BST
> Subject: Re: Lots of core files with latest xscreensaver-gnome
> 
> > >> (05.03.2004 @ 1344 PST): Stacey Roberts said, in 3.6K: <<
> > > Hi Adam,
> > >=20
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Adam Weinberger <adamw at FreeBSD.org>"
> > > To: To Stacey Roberts
> > > Date: Mon, 03 May, 2004 17:54 BST
> > > Subject: Re: Lots of core files with latest xscreensaver-gnome
> > >=20
> > > > Clear out everything in /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg and the run:
> > > >=20
> > > > portupgrade -u -a -f
> > > >=20
> > > > That will rebuild everything. After you clear out
> > > > /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg, nothing will run until you complete the
> > > > portupgrade.
> > >=20
> > > Thanks for the reply.
> > >=20
> > > As nothing (presumably this refers to X-related apps) will run in betwe=
> en "rm -rf'ing /usr/local/lib/compat/pkg/*" and the portupgrade cmd, is it =
> best then, to ensure that no-one is logged in on X during this exercise?
> > >=20
> > > If anything I'll be looking to run this overnight.
> > >=20
> > > Thanks again, Adam.
> > >=20
> > > Regards,
> > >=20
> > > Stacey
> > >> end of "Re: Lots of core files with latest xscreensaver-gnome" from St=
> acey Roberts <<
> >=20
> > That's probably the safest behaviour, yes. It's not that *nothing* will
> > run, but after you delete the stuff in .../pkg, a whole bunch of things
> > will be missing libraries.
> 
> Fair enough.., I'll make sure that X is off before the exercise for each ma=
> chine. I don't suppose you'd be able to let me know what kind of time-frame=
>  I could expect in terms of round-trip completion, would you?
> 
> >=20
> > I hope that someday they'll make -u a default argument to
> > portupgrade(1).
> 
> Hmm.., reading through the man pages here (from a *NON*-developer's perpect=
> ive), I guess I could see why the "-u" switch isn't default, just in case *=
> something* fails during the install / registration stages I suppose. Then t=
> here's a way to back out. But again, I stress that I'm not pretending to un=
> derstand that stuff.
> 
> On that note though.., see as on all my systems gnomemeeting is
> un-portupgradeable (openh323-1.12.0_3 is forbidden:
>http://people.freebsd.org/~eik/portaudit/27c331d5-64c7-11d8-80e3-0020ed76ef5a.html),
> what are the chances of gnomemeeting being in this state causing
> problems? I guess I'll find out later tonight, but its good to be prepared.

Gnomemeeting should not be a problem in this regard. It has also been
pulled from the standard gnome2 meta-port, so building gnome2 won't even
try to build gnomemeeting.

Unfortunately, I use GnomeMeeting, so I am hoping to get a chance to
work on getting pwlib and openh323 updated soon. (Not that I'll succeed,
but, if I can point out specific problems to Roger H, I'm hoping he can
point me in the right direction.)
-- 
R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer
Energy Sciences Network (ESnet)
Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab)
E-mail: oberman at es.net			Phone: +1 510 486-8634