gegl issue when doing rev-update

Bill Cole macportsusers-20171215 at
Mon Nov 12 19:00:00 UTC 2018

On 12 Nov 2018, at 12:24, Riccardo Mottola via macports-users wrote:


> however… when it ends it says:
> --->  Uninstalling curl-ca-bundle @7.61.1_3
> --->  Building list of distfiles still in use
>       [                                        ]  86.8 %Warning: All 
> compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to first 
> fallback option

That's unsettling.

> --->  Searching for unused distfiles
> Found 57 files (total 350.60 MiB) that are no longer needed and can be 
> deleted.
> [l]ist/[d]elete/[K]eep: d  		
> Deleting...
> This appears to be the first time you have run 'port reclaim'. Would 
> you like to be reminded to run it every two weeks? [Y/n]: n
> Reminders disabled. Run 'port reclaim --enable-reminders' to enable.
> --->  Scanning binaries for linking errors
> --->  Found 12 broken files, matching files to ports
> Warning: No port gegl found in the index; can't rebuild
> --->  Broken files found, but all associated ports are not in the 
> index and so cannot be rebuilt.
> I did rerum reclaim, it pruged further stuff and eventually gave no 
> gegl error!
> However, I could now uninstall gegl without getting dependency errors. 
> I suppose the issue is "fine" now?

I would think so. With so many inactive past versions of the gimp/gegl 
complex installed and the generic gegl port no longer existing, I'm not 
surprised that there was some confusion in what files belonged to which 

> I did not know that the check for broken packages would run also on 
> "inactive" ports,

I don't believe that it does. Your original post showed active versions 
of both gegl and gegl-0.4 (which are two *DIFFERENT* ports) plus 5 
inactive versions of gegl-0.4.

> this can be quite tricky, perhaps this caused more than some rebuilds 
> for me in the past?

It's hard to know. It is possible for distinct ports of the same package 
to co-exist and not interfere with each other as far as MacPorts is 
concerned, but to have quiet interference created when running the 
packages' own build processes that know nothing of MacPorts and its 
model for segregating major versions.

> I still get
> --->  Building list of distfiles still in use
>       [                                        ]  85.1 %Warning: All 
> compilers are either blacklisted or unavailable; defaulting to first 
> fallback option
> but, fine >(

That error is because some port (using the '-d' option should clarify 
which one) theoretically cannot be built with any installed and active 
compiler although it should be fine as long as you don't try to rebuild 
or upgrade it. How you got to that state is not clear.

Good luck!

More information about the macports-users mailing list