Keeping track of automatically installed dependency-only ports
shurd at sasktel.net
Mon Jun 18 09:35:05 UTC 2007
Peter Jeremy wrote:
> On 2007-Jun-16 20:44:53 -0700, Stephen Hurd <shurd at sasktel.net> wrote:
>>> Agreed, but this situation is not easy to detect with the automated
>>> ports checks that are in place.
>> Impossible even since we're not using automated tools.
> I was thinking of pointyhat
The scenario is installing something *not* from ports which relies on a
port which was installed as a dependency then removing the port that
required the dependency. The proposed feature would remove the
>> Of course, simply not automatically deinstalling SDL would help out quite a
>> bit. If I decide to remove SDL, all the results of that are my fault. If
>> removing portXXX also removes SDL, I can blame the ports system for removing
>> stuff out from under me.
> A normal 'pkg_delete' will not remove any ports other than those
> specified and will only remove the port(s) specified iff those ports
> have no other ports depending on them. If portXYZ registers a
> dependency on SDL then it will not be possible to remove SDL without
> disabling the dependency check (via '-f'). The problematic scenario
> is where the GNU configure script (or equivalent) for portXYZ senses
> the presence of SDL and decides to use it even though the port doesn't
> list SDL as a dependency.
1) The suggestion is that pkg_delete SHOULD remove dependencies with no
other dependencies marked.
2) The scenario I used was not a port, but a 3rd party piece of software.
More information about the freebsd-ports