keeping a (maximally) clean active tree

[William Davis]

On Dec 7, 2007, at 6:41 PM, paul beard wrote:

> On 12/7/07, William Davis <frstan at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>> pardon, but doesnt using -R  (-dfunR) take care of this?
>
> Yes, it does The Right Thing if there a newly-introduced mismatch in a
> port that has dependents.
>
>   -R       also upgrade dependents (only for upgrading)
>
> But I think that the OP was looking for a simpler way to upgrade
> existing ports without using "force" or ideally with no flags at all
> (well, maybe an optional -c).
>
> using -fundR is 5 flags, and I usually add -c, so we're up to 6
> arguments to do what many would expect to be the default operaion.
> -- 
> Paul Beard / www.paulbeard.org/
> <paulbeard at gmail.com/paulbeard at gmail.com>


yep, (except posibly -d) I prefer those as the defaults meself. :)

btw you know you find out what's outdated with
port outdated
very logical -- but then you would expected to update them with
port update foo (or all)
but you cant, you have to say
port upgrade foo  (and upgrade "all" installs all uninstalled ports).
Then to upgrade the port system itsself you'd expect
port selfupgrade but you cant. Instead you must say
port selfupdate.

;)

William Davis
frstanATbellsouthDOTnet
Mac OS X.5.1 Darwin 9.1.0
X11.app 2.1.0 - X.org X11R7.2
Mac Mini Intel Duo @ 1.86 GHz

Mundus vult decepi, ego non