#50233: port upgrade --force shouldn't uninstall if no permission was given to install a missing dependency -------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: rjvbertin@… | Owner: macports-tickets@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: Normal | Milestone: Component: base | Version: 2.3.4 Keywords: | Port: -------------------------+-------------------------------- This is a rare situation, that gave rise to a port being uninstalled in error, I consider: Given: a port "A" that has a build dependency on port "B1" which itself conflicts with port "B2". Once built, port "A" can co-exist with either "B1" or "B2"; in fact, "A" has a path-style *runtime* dependency on an executable provided by both B1 and B2 (path:bin/bb). Scenario (leaving out sudo, and ignoring the reasons why I proceeded this way): ```
port deactivate B2 port activate B1 port destroot A port deactivate B1 port activate B2 port -nv upgrade --force A ---> Computing dependencies for A.. The following dependencies will be installed: B1 Continue? [Y/n]: n ---> Deactivating A @version ---> Uninstalling A @version ---> Cleaning A ---> Removing work directory for A ---> Computing dependencies for A.. The following dependencies will be installed: B1 Continue? [Y/n]: n ---> Scanning binaries for linking errors
I consider that the process should have been aborted when I first refused
to install B1.
One could also consider that
- the depends_build dependency should be ignored since the build process
has been completed
- the depends_run dependency is satisfied by the presence of
${prefix}/bin/bb (provided by B2 at the time).
So in a sense there should be no missing dependency when doing an upgrade
.
--
Ticket URL: <https://trac.macports.org/ticket/50233>
MacPorts <https://www.macports.org/>
Ports system for OS X