pkgdb -F calling portupgrade -a

[Kris Kennaway]

On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 04:15:29PM -0700, Jeff Anton wrote:
> I'm very surprised and upset that running pkgdb -F has started a whole
> upgrade of my stable machine.

Well, it didn't.

>  I'm sure hacker's isn't the right list for this

Correct.

> but it is so amazing that I don't know what the right list would be

Ports problems go to the ports list.  Problems with a particular port
(e.g. portupgrade) go to that list and/or the port's maintainer.

> Deinstall xorg-manpages-6.9.0 ? [no] yes
> --->  Deinstalling 'xorg-manpages-6.9.0'
> [Updating the pkgdb <format:bdb_btree> in /var/db/pkg ... - 70 packages 
> found (-1 +0) (...) done]
> --> Done.
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> xf86dgaproto-2.0.2 (x11/xf86dgaproto):
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n
> New dependency? (? to help): .
> Abort.
> 62.580u 41.058s 2:08.82 80.4%   157+2488k 1300+1603io 12pf+0w

You need to go through the xorg 7.2 upgrade.  Most of what you chose
to do was actually damaging your port installations, e.g.

> --->  Checking the package registry database
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> xf86dgaproto-2.0.2 (x11/xf86dgaproto):
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n
                                                     ^
> New dependency? (? to help):
> Delete this? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes]
                                  ^^^^
Whee, you've deleted metadata that was required for correctness of
future upgrades.

> Deleted.
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> libXdamage-1.1.1 (x11/libXdamage):
> libXft-2.1.7_1 (score:25%) ? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [no]
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n
> New dependency? (? to help):
> Delete this? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes]
> Deleted.
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> renderproto-0.9.2 (x11/renderproto):
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n
> New dependency? (? to help):
> Delete this? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes]
> Deleted.
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> compositeproto-0.3.1 (x11/compositeproto):
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n
> New dependency? (? to help):
> Delete this? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes]
> Deleted.
> Stale dependency: Xaw3d-1.5E_1 -> libXv-1.0.3,1 (x11/libXv):
> libXft-2.1.7_1 (score:22%) ? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [no]
> Install stale dependency? ([y]es/[n]o/[a]ll) [yes] n

This is the only part that doesn't make sense.  Are you sure you
didn't do e.g. 'y^Hn' where that was not interpreted by the terminal
as a backspace but as a string beginning with 'y'?  It's the only way
I can think that this would trigger the 'yes' branch.

Anyway, it wasn't doing 'portupgrade -a' but trying to bring your
system up to a consistent state.  Really what you probably should have
done was either leave your system alone (i.e. not answered 'yes' to
requests to modify things), or go through the documented x.org 7.2
upgrade procedure to perform the upgrade correctly and completely.

Kris