Re: pkg_chk replacement?

[joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 02:46:25PM -0800, walt wrote:
> 
> First, the author specifically states that pkgmanager does *not*
> take responsibility for any package which fails to build.  This
> is my primary complaint about pkg_chk -u, and the one thing about
> portupgrade that I really miss.

For source builds, this would be possible if and only if the old
packages are available as binary packages and / or pkg_tarup is believed
to fully work. The latter is somewhat problematic since not all
meta-data of a package is present in /var/db/pkg. For the former I'd
invite you to suggest it as improvement to the maintainer, it certainly
sounds feasible.

Joerg