freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 157, Issue 29

[Nadow]

> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 14:12:10 +0000
> From: RW <fbsd06 at mlists.homeunix.com>
> Subject: Re: Using Screen
> To: freebsd-questions at freebsd.org
> Message-ID: <200611301412.11118.fbsd06 at mlists.homeunix.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Thursday 30 November 2006 01:27, Nadow wrote:
> > Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
> >
> > On Wednesday 29 November 2006 17:22, Dan Sikorsky wrote:
> > > Hey, I have a good question for you guys.
> > >
> > > Lets say, I started a job on a computer, if you must know, portmanager -u
> > > , and then left... but I know its sitting there stuck on a config window
> > > waiting for someone to press enter...
> >
> > Even easier, use portmaster. The first thing that do when installs a
> > port is making recursive all the "make config" windows of the port and
> > dependencies. After you have chosen the options of the last config
> > menu, it will install all the stuff till the end without interruption
> > (except error of course).
>
> Portmanager doesn't have a lot of bells and whistles, and it's by far the
> slowest upgrade tool around. People who use it do so because it's the most
> thorough tool around. By contrast portmaster uses a fairly minimalist
> approach.
>
> Portmaster is a clear alternative to portupgrade, it's not really a
> replacement for portmanager.
>

Well, portmanager is very good for emergency cases, when, for example,
your pkgdb is a complete mess and other tools like portupgrade it
won't work.

In these moments I use portmanager -u which will check all the
packages installed and their dependencies  and reinstall what has been
deleted or corrupted. Why it can do this? Because portmanager doesn't
update the pkgdb before o after a package installation....So I use it
for things that are broken, but for daily use y too slow IMO.

Regards