I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
"abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
thing with portmaster:
$ portupgrade --batch -a
If I issue this command I know exactly that I can go out, have a
drink, cook some dinner and unlock my workstation the next day and
find that everything completed unless a port failed to build. With
portmaster I get asked a s*t load of interactive questions, whether I
want to delete some package, whether it's really okay to pull in all
the dependencies and so on.
Can someone spoonfeed me the command I need to issue with portmaster
in order to achieve the same thing as with
$ portupgrade --batch -a
Is that even possible?
$ portupgrade --batch -a
Thanks in advance!
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
> thing with portmaster:
>
> $ portupgrade --batch -a
Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
--batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
there.
> If I issue this command I know exactly that I can go out, have a
> drink, cook some dinner and unlock my workstation the next day and
> find that everything completed unless a port failed to build.
You should be able to accomplish this with portmaster.
hth,
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
> thing with portmaster:
>
> $ portupgrade --batch -a
Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
--batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
there.
> If I issue this command I know exactly that I can go out, have a
> drink, cook some dinner and unlock my workstation the next day and
> find that everything completed unless a port failed to build.
You should be able to accomplish this with portmaster.
hth,
Doug
--
Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with
a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
-- Pablo Picasso
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
> thing with portmaster:
> $ portupgrade --batch -a
Try echo BATCH?=yes >>/etc/make.conf && portmaster --no-confirm -a
--
Adios
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
> thing with portmaster:
> $ portupgrade --batch -a
Try echo BATCH?=yes >>/etc/make.conf && portmaster --no-confirm -a
--
Adios
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>> thing with portmaster:
>>
>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>
> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>
> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
> there.
Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
:-)
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>> thing with portmaster:
>>
>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>
> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>
> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
> there.
Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
:-)
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 04:58, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
>> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>>> thing with portmaster:
>>>
>>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>>
>> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
>> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
>> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>>
>> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
>> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
>> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
>> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
>> there.
>
> Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
> normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
> :-)
>
> Sandra
I have done exactly what you want with (portmaster -a), albeit you
should sit there and wait for any option screens to pop up until you
leave but it can be done. But also see below.
Doug,
One fallback that I cannot seem to get over is the creation of a backup
package failed do you want to ignore [i] message prompt & the package
messages that are displayed with $PAGER at the end of the upgrades. I
do not recall the packages that his had happened on, it does not happen
often but when it did happen it was just before a nice long compile of
OpenOffice :( while I was gone.
The pkg-message problem has been stumping me since it inhibits my use of
pwait(1) on another terminal. For instance I started a portmaster -a on
one terminal and issued pwait(1) on another so I could build a new
kernel and world right after a ports(7) upgrade. Since the pkg-message
is displayed with PAGER obviously the initial portmaster process never
terminates and post processes are revolving so they would/could exit to
soon.
Do not prompt for a backup package creation failure and force creation
of whatever you have on the system already?
Configuration option to email the output of upgraded packages and their
pkg-message or a similar option to just log to a file?
Also I still see a need for installing a
/usr/local/etc/portmaster.rc.sample file for whatever version is
installed and seperating that from the man page. This would make it much
easier on the end user to configure portmaster for options they see fit.
Forwarded apologies if any of this is confusing.
Regards,
--
On another note I wish wc(1) would output some headers above these. ;)
$ man portmaster |wc -Lclmw
610 3363 30764 187
jhell,v
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On 08/06/2010 04:58, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
>> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>>> thing with portmaster:
>>>
>>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>>
>> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
>> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
>> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>>
>> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
>> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
>> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
>> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
>> there.
>
> Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
> normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
> :-)
>
> Sandra
I have done exactly what you want with (portmaster -a), albeit you
should sit there and wait for any option screens to pop up until you
leave but it can be done. But also see below.
Doug,
One fallback that I cannot seem to get over is the creation of a backup
package failed do you want to ignore [i] message prompt & the package
messages that are displayed with $PAGER at the end of the upgrades. I
do not recall the packages that his had happened on, it does not happen
often but when it did happen it was just before a nice long compile of
OpenOffice :( while I was gone.
The pkg-message problem has been stumping me since it inhibits my use of
pwait(1) on another terminal. For instance I started a portmaster -a on
one terminal and issued pwait(1) on another so I could build a new
kernel and world right after a ports(7) upgrade. Since the pkg-message
is displayed with PAGER obviously the initial portmaster process never
terminates and post processes are revolving so they would/could exit to
soon.
Do not prompt for a backup package creation failure and force creation
of whatever you have on the system already?
Configuration option to email the output of upgraded packages and their
pkg-message or a similar option to just log to a file?
Also I still see a need for installing a
/usr/local/etc/portmaster.rc.sample file for whatever version is
installed and seperating that from the man page. This would make it much
easier on the end user to configure portmaster for options they see fit.
Forwarded apologies if any of this is confusing.
Regards,
--
On another note I wish wc(1) would output some headers above these. ;)
$ man portmaster |wc -Lclmw
610 3363 30764 187
jhell,v
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
Hello Sandra
I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
-a: Take all installed ports
-d: Delete any dependicies
-no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
1. If you run in an compile error
2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
Regards,
2010/8/6 Sandra Kachelmann <>:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
>> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>>> thing with portmaster:
>>>
>>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>>
>> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
>> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
>> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>>
>> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
>> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
>> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
>> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
>> there.
>
> Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
> normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
> :-)
>
> Sandra
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
Hello Sandra
I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
-a: Take all installed ports
-d: Delete any dependicies
-no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
1. If you run in an compile error
2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
Regards,
2010/8/6 Sandra Kachelmann <>:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Doug Barton <> wrote:
>> On 08/06/2010 00:24, Sandra Kachelmann wrote:
>>> I've been using ports-mgmt/portupgrade pretty much ever since it
>>> started to exist. Unfortunately portupgrade seems to be pretty much
>>> "abandonware" so I've been told to move on to portmaster. Despite the
>>> very long manpage I can't seem to be able to achieve the following
>>> thing with portmaster:
>>>
>>> $ portupgrade --batch -a
>>
>> Someone who has used portupgrade and is familiar with exactly what
>> --batch does can probably help you with that bit, but I'm sure by now
>> you've figured out that portmaster has a -a feature.
>>
>> Meanwhile, go get a $BEVERAGE, get comfortable, and actually _read_ the
>> portmaster man page, don't just skim through it. I put a lot of effort
>> into explain what portmaster does, how it does it, and also WHY it does
>> things the way it does. Most (if not all) of your questions are answered
>> there.
>
> Please don't take this wrong but IMO it's way too overdocumented for
> normal users that don't actually read bsd.ports.mk before breakfast
> :-)
>
> Sandra
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
<> wrote:
> Hello Sandra
>
> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
>
> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>
> -a: Take all installed ports
> -d: Delete any dependicies
> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
>
> With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
> 1. If you run in an compile error
> 2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
>
> I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
Hi Martin
Thank you for your answer (and everyone else who replied). This is
exactly the reason why I keep going back to portupgrade. Default
OPTIONS almost always work for me - if not I go to the ports directory
and run make config then let the --batch option of portinstall deal
with everything.
It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that
would act like portupgrade.
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
<> wrote:
> Hello Sandra
>
> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
>
> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>
> -a: Take all installed ports
> -d: Delete any dependicies
> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
>
> With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
> 1. If you run in an compile error
> 2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
>
> I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
Hi Martin
Thank you for your answer (and everyone else who replied). This is
exactly the reason why I keep going back to portupgrade. Default
OPTIONS almost always work for me - if not I go to the ports directory
and run make config then let the --batch option of portinstall deal
with everything.
It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that
would act like portupgrade.
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 14:44:09 +0200
Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
> It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that
> would act like portupgrade.
Does setting BATCH in the environment not work?
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
> > <> wrote:
> >> Hello Sandra
> >>
> >> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
> >>
> >> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
> >>
> >> -a: Take all installed ports
> >> -d: Delete any dependicies
> >> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
> >>
> >> With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
> >> 1. If you run in an compile error
> >> 2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
> >>
> >> I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
> >
> > Hi Martin
> >
> > Thank you for your answer (and everyone else who replied). This is
> > exactly the reason why I keep going back to portupgrade. Default
> > OPTIONS almost always work for me - if not I go to the ports directory
> > and run make config then let the --batch option of portinstall deal
> > with everything.
> >
> > It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that
> > would act like portupgrade.
>
> Does setting BATCH in the environment not work?
Unfortunately not. I tried:
$ BATCH=yes portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
and like someone else suggested adding BATCH?=yes to /etc/make.conf,
then running:
$ portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
Still asks me to confirm all the options.
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
> > <> wrote:
> >> Hello Sandra
> >>
> >> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
> >>
> >> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
> >>
> >> -a: Take all installed ports
> >> -d: Delete any dependicies
> >> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
> >>
> >> With the above switch portmaster waits in two case:
> >> 1. If you run in an compile error
> >> 2. If the port is new and will asks you about make config
> >>
> >> I did now three upgrades like above and it worked as expected.
> >
> > Hi Martin
> >
> > Thank you for your answer (and everyone else who replied). This is
> > exactly the reason why I keep going back to portupgrade. Default
> > OPTIONS almost always work for me - if not I go to the ports directory
> > and run make config then let the --batch option of portinstall deal
> > with everything.
> >
> > It would be extremely nice if there would be a --batch option that
> > would act like portupgrade.
>
> Does setting BATCH in the environment not work?
Unfortunately not. I tried:
$ BATCH=yes portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
and like someone else suggested adding BATCH?=yes to /etc/make.conf,
then running:
$ portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
Still asks me to confirm all the options.
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Sandra Kachelmann
<> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
>> > <> wrote:
>> >> Hello Sandra
>> >>
>> >> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
>> >>
>> >> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>> >>
>> >> -a: Take all installed ports
>> >> -d: Delete any dependicies
>> >> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
> and like someone else suggested adding BATCH?=yes to /etc/make.conf,
> then running:
>
> $ portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>
> Still asks me to confirm all the options.
If you absolutely do not want to see the OPTIONS screens, no matter
what, then add -G (see man page for details).
--
Freddie Cash
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Sandra Kachelmann
<> wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
>> > <> wrote:
>> >> Hello Sandra
>> >>
>> >> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
>> >>
>> >> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>> >>
>> >> -a: Take all installed ports
>> >> -d: Delete any dependicies
>> >> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
> and like someone else suggested adding BATCH?=yes to /etc/make.conf,
> then running:
>
> $ portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>
> Still asks me to confirm all the options.
If you absolutely do not want to see the OPTIONS screens, no matter
what, then add -G (see man page for details).
--
Freddie Cash
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Freddie Cash <> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 6:26 AM, Sandra Kachelmann
> <> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Sandra Kachelmann <> wrote:
>>> > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 1:52 PM, Martin Schweizer
>>> > <> wrote:
>>> >> Hello Sandra
>>> >>
>>> >> I was in a similar situation. I found the following paramters very usefull:
>>> >>
>>> >> portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>>> >>
>>> >> -a: Take all installed ports
>>> >> -d: Delete any dependicies
>>> >> -no--confirm: Wait not after the check which ports are upgradable
>
>> and like someone else suggested adding BATCH?=yes to /etc/make.conf,
>> then running:
>>
>> $ portmaster -a -d --no-confirm
>>
>> Still asks me to confirm all the options.
>
> If you absolutely do not want to see the OPTIONS screens, no matter
> what, then add -G (see man page for details).
I tried that but if i run
$ portmaster --no-confirm -G /usr/ports/x11/xorg
The libiconv OPTIONS dialog pops up.
Sandra
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________
Posted on the Freebsd-ports mailing list. Go to http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports to subscribe.
