pkgng vs. portupgrade reporting ports outdated

[Matthew Seaman]

On 04/04/2014 23:02, sindrome wrote:
> So I still keep my source, ports and docs in sync via svn update.  Here's
> where the issue comes in.  After I have done the pkg upgrade and it tells me
> all is up-to-date, the 'pkg_version -v |grep needs' command shows me dozens
> of ports that are not up-to-date and further the versions it's saying I have
> installed are not consistent with the versions that were installed through
> pkgng.   If I try and portupgrade it won't upgrade the ports and just
> returns me to the prompt as if there is nothing out of date.

> Why is there such a difference here?  It seems that if I do a pkgng update /
> pkg upgrade it should be consistent with the same versions that are being
> reported after an 'svn update' and report back that all ports are up-to-date
> no matter which command I type.  So now I can't seem to upgrade through
> portupgrade to get the rest of the ports to the versions reported in the
> ports tree and pkgng says I'm up-to-date.


Once you have switched to pkg(8), the old pkg_tools commands will return
bogus results.  You *cannot* mix usage of pkg(8) and pkg_tools.  I don't
know why this seems to be such a difficult concept for people to understand.

In your case, you need to use 'pkg version -v' not 'pkg_version -v'.
Actually instead of this:

   pkg version -v | grep needs

Try this:

   pkg version -vIl\<

That compares your installed ports to what is listed as available in the
ports index.

	Cheers,

	Matthew

-- 
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil.
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1036 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20140405/9f16ccff/attachment.sig>