port upgrade causes problems when port not installed
I just had an interesting problem, as detailed in ticket <http:// trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/11200>. Can anybody tell me why port upgrade used to build first, then install the new one, then deactivate/uninstall the old, then activate the new? And why now it's always deactivating/uninstalling first before installing the new? Except, as you can see in my log, doing the upgrade without it already installed finished the aborted build, installed, then uninstalled and started trying to re-build/install again? -- Kevin Ballard http://kevin.sb.org eridius@macports.org http://www.tildesoft.com
On Dec 28, 2006, at 8:17 PM, Kevin Ballard wrote:
I just had an interesting problem, as detailed in ticket <http:// trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/11200>.
Can anybody tell me why port upgrade used to build first, then install the new one, then deactivate/uninstall the old, then activate the new? And why now it's always deactivating/uninstalling first before installing the new?
Because we changed the upgrade target to 'unarchive' (and never changed it back). (I sent a mail to the list on August 25 outlining the issue). I don't have commit to base/ and those that do seemed to ignore it, though.
Except, as you can see in my log, doing the upgrade without it already installed finished the aborted build, installed, then uninstalled and started trying to re-build/install again?
If you aren't using archive mode, and you turn it off (as it's now off by default), the upgrade target will be 'destroot' and things should work like they used to. -- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- dluke@geeklair.net ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+
On Dec 29, 2006, at 9:58 AM, Daniel J. Luke wrote:
Except, as you can see in my log, doing the upgrade without it already installed finished the aborted build, installed, then uninstalled and started trying to re-build/install again?
If you aren't using archive mode, and you turn it off (as it's now off by default), the upgrade target will be 'destroot' and things should work like they used to.
Off by default? huh. I use it once in a blue moon, but maybe I should just turn it off. Thanks, Kevin Ballard -- Kevin Ballard http://kevin.sb.org eridius@macports.org http://www.tildesoft.com
On Dec 29, 2006, at 5:56 PM, Kevin Ballard wrote:
If you aren't using archive mode, and you turn it off (as it's now off by default), the upgrade target will be 'destroot' and things should work like they used to.
Off by default? huh.
yep. portmgr (and landonf) decided that archivemode isn't very useful (especially with image mode being the default). Personally, I switched to direct mode on one machine when there were hardlink performance issues and haven't switched back (direct mode + archives leaves most of the advantages of image mode, is conceptually simpler, and could probably totally replace image mode with a little work, in my opinion).
I use it once in a blue moon, but maybe I should just turn it off.
-- Daniel J. Luke +========================================================+ | *---------------- dluke@geeklair.net ----------------* | | *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* | +========================================================+ | Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily | | reflect the opinions of my employer. | +========================================================+
participants (2)
-
Daniel J. Luke
-
Kevin Ballard