#7024: port 1.300 builds all dependencies regardless of state ---------------------------------+------------------------------------------ Reporter: stephen@xemacs.org | Owner: macports-tickets@lists.macosforge.org Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: ports | Version: 1.0 Resolution: wontfix | Keywords: ---------------------------------+------------------------------------------ Old description:
using port -u -f all dependencies get rebuilt unconditionally. this gives absurdities like
Warning: Uninstall forced. Proceeding despite dependencies. ---> Deactivating readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Uninstalling readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Packaging tgz archive for readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Installing readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Activating readline 5.0.005_0
At least it finds the existing distribution tarballs.
This has been observed just now for sqlite (which didn't need an upgrade but got rebuilt, as well as readline the dependency---the missing "3" was a typo) and sqlite3 (which did need an upgrade), and for several GNOME packages (all libraries) a few days ago.
"port upgrade graphviz" just now only rebuilt graphviz (thank heavens, since it depends on X).
port's dependency algorithms seem really fragile and often unintuitive.
New description: using port -u -f all dependencies get rebuilt unconditionally. this gives absurdities like {{{ Warning: Uninstall forced. Proceeding despite dependencies. ---> Deactivating readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Uninstalling readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Packaging tgz archive for readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Installing readline 5.0.005_0 ---> Activating readline 5.0.005_0 }}} At least it finds the existing distribution tarballs. This has been observed just now for sqlite (which didn't need an upgrade but got rebuilt, as well as readline the dependency---the missing "3" was a typo) and sqlite3 (which did need an upgrade), and for several GNOME packages (all libraries) a few days ago. "port upgrade graphviz" just now only rebuilt graphviz (thank heavens, since it depends on X). port's dependency algorithms seem really fragile and often unintuitive. Comment (by jmpp@macports.org): This actually seems to me like a duplicate of #10827, even though it was closed as "wontfix", don't know why. -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/ticket/7024#comment:10> MacPorts </projects/macports> Ports system for Mac OS