Ports, pkg's confusion on upgrades...

[Michael Gmelin]

> On 15 Aug 2014, at 14:43, Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst at tdx.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> --On 15 August 2014 12:52 +0200 Łukasz Wąsikowski <lukasz at wasikowski.net> wrote:
> 
>> You could solve this by using your own poudriere - create repos with
>> your own port's options and pkg upgrade everything. Your current
>> approach - mixing packages and ports - is not supported IIRC.
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion - and I take your point about not mixing ports & packages...
> 
> Setting up our own pkg repo though sounds like a lot of work (all for the sake of about probably 2 packages we need to change the options on) - I'd guess there's no way of telling pkg to use 'our' repo for these 2-3 packages, and the main one for everything else?

If it's only about two or three ports and those are leave ports (things like nginx), mixing pkg and ports works ok in practice. 


> 
> I suppose the other option is just ignore packages, and stick to ports? (presuming ports will always be around :)
> 
> 
> I'd also still like to know if there's a way of getting 'pkg upgrade' to spit out why it wants to install a 'new package' - when none of the current packages have a dependency on it?
> 
> This is going to happen at some point, even on a pkg only system (e.g. what happens when pkg upgrade says it's going to install X11 [which nothing currently 'depends' on] - but obviously some upgraded package does - you'd really want to know what's going to cause X to be installed?
> 
> -Karl
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"