pkg delete dilema

[Mario Lobo]

On Tue, 10 May 2016 15:27:11 -0500
Brandon J. Wandersee <brandon.wandersee at gmail.com> wrote:

> Matthew Seaman writes:
> 
> > On 10/05/2016 18:44, Mario Lobo wrote:  
> >> So, is there a way to tell pkg just to delete the package WITHOUT
> >> deleting the dependent ports? If not, is there a way for me to
> >> remove just the cups-client port? Or just force cups to get
> >> installed (make FORCE_PKG_REGISTER=yes install issues the same
> >> problem as plain make above)?  
> >
> > pkg delete -f cups-client
> >
> > 	Cheers,
> >
> > 	Matthew  
> 
> From the pkg-delete(8) man page:
> 
> | -f, --force
> |            Forces packages to be removed despite leaving unresolved
> |            dependencies.  In combination with the -a or --all flag,
> |            causes pkg(8) to be removed as well as all other
> packages.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but that bit about "despite leaving
> unresolved dependencies" is not inconsequential. Yes, it will allow
> Mario to upgrade one port, but will also essentially leave all those
> ports with recorded dependencies on outdated cups-* packages
> unresolvable, won't it? That is, when it comes time to upgrade other
> ports pkg(8) will then complain that dependencies of those ports
> can't be resolved, won't it?
> 

Yes! It will! But I desperately needed to print something so I had to
make it work. I will deal with the dependencies later.

> 
> I could be wrong. I have to admit that I don't know all the
> ins-and-outs of pkg(8), but (if I may be blunt) the conventional
> wisdom I learned from my Arch Linux days was "Don't ever use 'pacman
> --force' unless you know what you're doing---and if you think using
> 'pacman --force' is a good idea, you don't know what you're doing."
> 

Right! It is not a good idea but I had to.

-- 
Mario Lobo
http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br
FreeBSD since 2.2.8 [not Pro-Audio.... YET!!]
 
"UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, 
because that would also stop you from doing clever things."