Let me start by adding a couple attachments: current out-of-date-update.py and a faac..log.
The key element is that I am doing something like make clear=all repackage install and yet out-of-date c56.0->c57.0 faac message do not clear. Looking at the log, I have the idea that I really need to remove a faac-1.26 file of some sort from pobj. So I can do that, but I wonder if there is some magic make incantation that will do better by me. Also, if a rm on a pobj file is needed, this circumstances seems to me to be unfortunate. Thank you for your consideration. ________________________________ From: Stuart Henderson <[email protected]> To: viq <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: Max Stalnaker <[email protected]> Sent: Fri, October 8, 2010 2:09:05 PM Subject: Re: understanding out-of-date in infrastructure behavior On 2010/10/08 18:15, viq wrote: > On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 07:09:01AM -0700, Max Stalnaker wrote: > > thanks for your response. libc is more meaniful to me than c.56.0! > > > > Now it is true that I had done even a make all on faac using current a > > few > > > days ago. I would have hoped that would clear dependency problems like >this. > "make all" just builds the port. "make package" builds a package from it providing one doesn't already exist. "make repackage" cleans any existing packages of the same name and builds new ones. > > On the other hand, looking at all the audio/faac files, I just do not see >where > > > they are version sensitive to this, at least when I looked before I knew > > to > > look for libc stuff. Let's say you have libfoo.so.1.0, which links against libc.so.56.0, and a program foobar which is linked against libfoo.so.1.0 and libc.so.57.0. When you try and run foobar you have a conflict because you can't have both incompatible versions of libc in the same process space. This is why when libraries are bumped you need to update many packages at once. > > Now, libc is not something that can be reasonable found with make search > > key=libc, but find / -name "libc" does okay and I see a devel port with an > > unexpected name which I proceeded to build. make clean package install. We have "make clean=all" now, this also removes packages, or you can "make repackage". > > Hmm, maybe I overwrote a good *system* libc by doing this? Packages do not overwrite system files. > > Now I then run out-of-date-update.py a couple of times and what I get is >still > > > faac #c.56.0->c.57.0. > > And it is easy at this point to see many many ports with the same sole >issue > > > as far as build/out-of-date would be concerned. And my update just does a > > clean and skips the rest of the make targets. > > > > so "faac should be rebuilt/updated", but what this means at this point is > > unclear to me. > > > > Please advise. > > libc is in base system, ports don't affect it. > 'make repackage' is what you are looking for in this case. > I was thinking myself of a script that would delete all existing built > packages of what is listed by out-of-date, but did not look at that yet. viq, make SUBDIRLIST=/tmp/outofdate clean=package (or clean=all) would probably do the trick for you here.
out-of-date-update.py
Description: Binary data
faac-1.26.log
Description: Binary data
