Hi, I am begining to think there is something wrong with portutils (notice the difference between pkg_version and portversion): buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#portversion -v | grep -v XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has 4.3.0_1) cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port has 16.1g) ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs updating (port has 7.05_4) portupgrade-20030308_2 > succeeds port (port has 20030228) buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#pkg_version -v | grep -v XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has 4.3.0_1) cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port has 16.1g) fontconfig-2.1_6 < needs updating (port has 2.1_7) ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs updating (port has 7.05_5) lftp-2.6.4 < needs updating (port has 2.6.5) mutt-devel-1.5.3 < needs updating (port has 1.5.4) net-snmp-5.0.6 < needs updating (port has 5.0.8) w3m-0.4 < needs updating (port has 0.4.1) buki@dak2060:/home/buki>uname -a FreeBSD dak2060.xx.xx.cz 5.0-RELEASE-p7 FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 #4: Mon Mar 31 10:56:15 CEST 2003 buki@dak2060.xx.xx.cz:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DAK2060 i386 ports cvsup-ed today an hour ago also, I am getting some 'Checksum mismatch' errors, namely with w3m, lftp. Buki -- PGP public key: http://dev.null.cz/buki.asc /"\ \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML & Outlook Mail / \ http://www.thebackrow.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20030331/07c6f825/attachment.bin
On Monday 31 March 2003 08:32 am, Buki wrote:> Hi, > > I am begining to think there is something wrong with portutils > (notice the difference between pkg_version and portversion): > > buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#portversion -v | grep -v > XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has 4.3.0_1) > cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port has 16.1g) > ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs updating (port has 7.05_4) > portupgrade-20030308_2 > succeeds port (port has 20030228) > > buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#pkg_version -v | grep -v > XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has > 4.3.0_1) cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port > has 16.1g) fontconfig-2.1_6 < needs updating > (port has 2.1_7) ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs > updating (port has 7.05_5) lftp-2.6.4 < > needs updating (port has 2.6.5) mutt-devel-1.5.3 < > needs updating (port has 1.5.4) net-snmp-5.0.6 > < needs updating (port has 5.0.8) w3m-0.4 > < needs updating (port has 0.4.1) > > buki@dak2060:/home/buki>uname -a > FreeBSD dak2060.xx.xx.cz 5.0-RELEASE-p7 FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 #4: > Mon Mar 31 10:56:15 CEST 2003 > buki@dak2060.xx.xx.cz:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DAK2060 i386 > > ports cvsup-ed today an hour ago >Did you "portsdb -uU" to upgrade your INDEX files? This is the kind of thing that a mismatched INDEX and INDEX.dv would produce. Kent> also, I am getting some 'Checksum mismatch' errors, namely with w3m, > lftp. > > Buki-- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
On Mon, 31 Mar 2003, Buki wrote:> I am begining to think there is something wrong with portutils > (notice the difference between pkg_version and portversion): > > buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#portversion -v | grep -v > XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has 4.3.0_1) > cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port has 16.1g) > ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs updating (port has 7.05_4) > portupgrade-20030308_2 > succeeds port (port has 20030228) > > buki@dak2060:/usr/ports#pkg_version -v | grep -v > XFree86-libraries-4.3.0 < needs updating (port has 4.3.0_1) > cvsup-without-gui-16.1f < needs updating (port has 16.1g) > fontconfig-2.1_6 < needs updating (port has 2.1_7) > ghostscript-gnu-7.05_3 < needs updating (port has 7.05_5) > lftp-2.6.4 < needs updating (port has 2.6.5) > mutt-devel-1.5.3 < needs updating (port has 1.5.4) > net-snmp-5.0.6 < needs updating (port has 5.0.8) > w3m-0.4 < needs updating (port has 0.4.1)The difference is that portversion uses ports/INDEX to find "current" information about the ports to be compared to the installed packages, but pkg_version instead looks directly at the ports in question, bypassing INDEX. pkg_version is slower, but always correct. Do a 'make index' in /usr/ports to make an up-to-date INDEX and then compare them again. -- Chris Dillon - cdillon(at)wolves.k12.mo.us FreeBSD: The fastest and most stable server OS on the planet - Available for IA32 (Intel x86) and Alpha architectures - IA64, PowerPC, UltraSPARC, ARM, and S/390 under development - http://www.freebsd.org No trees were harmed in the composition of this message, although some electrons were mildly inconvenienced.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2003 at 06:32:32PM +0200, Buki wrote:> buki@dak2060:/home/buki>uname -a > FreeBSD dak2060.xx.xx.cz 5.0-RELEASE-p7 FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE-p7 #4: Mon Mar 31 10:56:15 CEST 2003 buki@dak2060.xx.xx.cz:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/DAK2060 i386Removing the full domain is not really usefull if it's recording in the mail-headers: Received: (from buki@localhost) by dak2060.sh.cvut.cz (8.12.6p2/8.12.6/Submit) id h2VGWWcB013815 for stable@freebsd.org; Mon, 31 Mar 2003 18:32:32 +0200 (CEST) Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.mavetju.org edwin@mavetju.org | Weblog: http://www.mavetju.org/weblog/weblog.php