portupgrade -> portmaster Rosetta Stone?

[Conrad J. Sabatier]

On Sat, 3 Mar 2012 07:15:23 -0500
Robert Huff <roberthuff at rcn.com> wrote:

> 
> Doug Barton writes:
> 
> >  On 3/2/2012 11:06 PM, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote:
> >  > Doug, is there a way to emulate portupgrade's "-k" (keep going)
> >  > option, to have the remaining list of ports to be built still
> >  > continue processing even if one port's build fails?
> >  
> >  You haven't missed it, the answer is no. It's part of that
> >  "portmaster can't read minds" problem that if something fails, I
> >  have no way of knowing if the rest of the updates should stop as
> >  a result.
> 
> 	But ... isn't this a case where you don't have to read minds?
> It seems (to me) the user would be saying "I understand the risk,
> and accept responsibility for dealing with the consequences.".  At
> that point, whether thet're right or wrong is not your problem ....
> 
> 
> 					Robert Huff

Yes, that's how I feel about it, myself, and it seems to have been the
philosophy of the portupgrade author as well.  Let the user shoot
himself in the foot.  :-)

-- 
Conrad J. Sabatier
conrads at cox.net