Re: portmaster -R (Was: Re: HEADS-UP: Shared Library Versions bumped...)

Mel Flynn wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 July 2009 10:48:33 Doug Barton wrote:
>> Alson van der Meulen wrote:
>>> * Doug Barton <dougb_at_FreeBSD.org> [2009-07-29 18:13]:
>>>> Mel Flynn wrote:
>>>>> Gotcha. Is there a reason the flags are removed if the options are not
>>>>> "-r or -f"?
>>>> Yes, so we don't have stale flags sitting around forever to confuse
>>>> future runs.
>>> I have been bitten by this in the past. A run of portmaster -r
>>> some-lib-that-half-of-my-ports-depend-on aborted because of a shared
>>> library error in a dependency which was not recompiled before the
>>> dependent port. I recompiled the dependency with a manual portmaster
>>> $portname, after this portmaster -r had to start all over. I didn't
>>> expect portmaster to clear the PM_DONE flags during non-resumable
>>> operations like rebuilding a single port (and the manpage contains very
>>> little information about -R). My workaround is to use portupgrade for
>>> these manual fixes.
>> Yes, I've been considering that exact scenario since atm I'm
>> rebuilding all my ports with -afR.
>>
>> How about this? When the user has -[rf] but not -R, and there are flag
>> files present, ask if they should be cleared before beginning to do
>> anything. Otherwise (no -[rf]) ignore them. Sound good?
> 
> That's definitely "what you would expect it to do".

Ok, good. I've refined that slightly so that if the user chooses not
to delete them they are offered the option of enabling the -R option.

Thanks for the feedback.

Doug

-- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection