ports hosed

[Kent Stewart]

On Sunday 04 April 2004 12:21 pm, Jay Moore wrote:
> On Sunday 04 April 2004 08:07 am, Kent Stewart wrote:
> > > # portupgrade -f lang/ruby18
> > > Stale dependency: ruby-1.8.1_2 --> openssl-0.9.7d -- manually run
> > > 'pkgdb -F' to fix, or specify -O to force.
> > > # pkgdb -F
> > > --->  Checking the package registry database
> > > Stale dependency: openldap-client-2.1.29 -> openssl-0.9.7d
> > > (security/openssl): openoffice-1.1.0_1 (score:23%) ?
>
> ---- <snip> ----
>
> > > What is this? I don't understand the question... Is this
> > > documented anywhere?
> >
> > You didn't do a portupgrade -rRa. The easy way is to upgrade or
> > install openssl-0.9.7d.
>
> Thanks, Kent. I was following the procedure in /usr/ports/UPDATING,
> and the question seemed so out of context... I mean
> "openoffice-1.1.0_1(score:23%)" - what's with that?
>
> Anyway, as I read ports-using.html from the Handbook, portupgrade -a
> is a "superset" of "portupgrade -rRa"... is that correct?
>
> Bottom line here (in my case) is this: I'm afraid my ports tree may
> be BFU; this all started when I tried to install the "K3b" port which
> apparently has a bazillion dependencies. At least one of the tar.gz
> files couldn't be located, and things have kind of gone downhill from
> there :(    For me, I'm afraid that salvation may require "wiping"
> the entire ports tree, and re-installing it from the 5.2 cd.   Is
> there a safe & clean way  to do that?
>

It was the closest thing to openssl. There is what I think is a problem 
with ports such as openssl. It is in the makefile to portupgrade but if 
you do a make search, it doesn't show up. When you see an obvious link 
problem like you saw, check if you have it installed. If you do/don't 
just upgrade/install what is missing. 

Kent

-- 
Kent Stewart
Richland, WA

http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html