On Friday, November 12, 2004, at 05:47 AM, Florian Stoehr wrote:

>
> Well, think about a library package: If you update it, all dependent 
> packages should be recompiled and relinked against that new package. 
> The system doesn not know that "perl" doesn't get linked in anywhere.
>
> So the system behaves right here.

Except it should not take out everything before recompiling.  It should 
do it after a successful build.

The only time I tried a 'make update', it took out everything, then 
died with a horrible mismatch of installed versions, a mangled package 
registration, and a lot of items missing on my system.

It took a whole weekend put back together (for me, on a Qube 2).  And 
the rebuild was full of helpful errors about missing libraries and 
header files when they were clearly present in their needed place, and 
things that could not be deleted even though they really should be 
delete-able, etc.  So it took a while to find all the little pieces to 
fix.

Nope, no more make update for me.  I'll note which packages require the 
component and rebuild them by hand, but I'm totally ignoring the 
"helpful" information provided with most builds when a related library 
needs updated, and "pkg_delete" then  "make reinstall" and rebuild 
rather than use this "easy", suggested 'make update' option again.

I know it's not just me, there were a few comments about this about a 
month ago.  If it would delete and reinstall without stopping in the 
middle, having first created havoc, that would be one thing.  I think 
the best solution would be to have make update build in a different dir 
tree, then if all works, copy files where they should go.

Just my recent experiences.

Brian

-- 
... we parted each feeling
superior to the other and is not that
feeling after all one of the great
desiderata of social intercourse
-archy
_The Life and Times of Archy and Mehitabel_