cvs commit: ports UPDATING ports/Mk bsd.python.mk ports/biology/pymol Makefile pkg-plist ports/cad/pythoncad Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/gadfly Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/skytools Makefile pkg-plist ports/databases/zodb3 ...

[Ion-Mihai Tetcu]

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 10:34:54 -0400
Wesley Shields <wxs at FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:12:32AM +0200, Rene Ladan wrote:
> > 2009/6/9 Martin Wilke <miwi at freebsd.org>:
> > > miwi        2009-06-08 22:30:55 UTC
> > >
> > >  FreeBSD ports repository
> > >
> > >  Modified files:
> > >    .                    UPDATING
> > [...]
> > >  Log:
> > >  - Update lang/python26 and make Python 2.6.2 to the default
> > > Python version
> > >
> > >  Tested by:      3 pointyhat runs
> > >  Thanks to:      pav, gahr, lwhsu, mva, amdmi3
> > >
> > I successfully upgraded python25 to python26 using portmaster -o,
> > but got stuck at the upgrade-site-packages step.
> > When executing
> > # cd /usr/ports/lang/python
> > # make PORTUPGRADE_CMD=/usr/local/sbin/portmaster
> > upgrade-site-packages
> > 
> > it complains that it can't find pkg_which, which seems to be part of
> > portupgrade.
> > Is pkg_which the same as pkg_info -wq or pkg_info -oq ?
> 
> You can use pkg_info -qW but there are other subtleties involved. For
> example, the usage of pkg_which can take multiple arguments on the
> command line but pkg_info can not. This means you have to use "-L 1"
> with xargs which drastically slows things down. I'm working on a patch
> which I hope to send out for review soon.
> 
> > Is there a real difference between make upgrade-site-packages and
> > just updating all installed *py25* packages manually?
> 
> Yes, as it's not just py25 packages that need to be updated. For
> example there are files in /usr/local/lib/python2.5/site-packages
> which pkg_info tells me came from a package that does not start with
> py25 (in this case it is pyblosxom).
> 
> For now I have spoken with Martin and removed the portmaster
> instructions from UPDATING because of the issues you outline in this
> thread.

FYI, we're testing a portmaster solution.Expect a commit tonight /
tomorrow.


-- 
IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user"
  "Intellectual Property" is   nowhere near as valuable   as "Intellect"
FreeBSD committer -> itetcu at FreeBSD.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20090609/c984c908/signature.pgp