Impact of running pkgdb -fu

[Kris Kennaway]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 05:56:08PM -0700, Dan MacMillan wrote:
> > Kris Kennaway Sent: March 19, 2004 17:46
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 05:34:38PM -0700, Dan MacMillan wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have a question about the effect of running "pkgdb -fu",
> > > besides making me laugh because of its whimsically profane
> > > command-line options.
> > >
> > > Suppose I have been running "pkgdb -F" as suggested by
> > > portupgrade, and I accidentally delete a stale dependency
> > > that should have been handled in another way.  Will
> > > rebuilding the package database with "pkgdb -fu" restore
> > > this dependency to its pristine, correct state?
> >
> > No, the dependency was removed from the installed package.  You need
> > to explicitly restore it, e.g. by reinstalling it.
> >
> 
> Thanks for your reply ... but now I'm a little confused.  The dependencies
> are stored in the packages themselves?  Would that be in the tarball in the
> /usr/ports/distfiles directory?  Where can I go to learn more about this,
> specifically the anatomy of a binary package and the structure of the
> package database?

Packages register themselves in /var/db/pkg when installed.  Read the
pkg_create and related manpages for more details.

Kris
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/attachments/20040319/a7bed023/attachment.bin