From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 22 04:18:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ports@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC73F16A4DE for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:18:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from leafy7382@gmail.com) Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.182]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFB1143D45 for ; Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:18:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from leafy7382@gmail.com) Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id o67so2685883pye for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:18:26 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NTc2wacPAgYSkAVDs9++Pny77t1Dq4WwF/HPxaFo3mOMYuTRywzLaDdXlIy8xQrSMdOL5epid2YEdsrEN5JP6LpQTJG36LEUKLKpw7f/fNi/vzypJc/XD3b5i218+PoYr0+PoL+yHVnL90or8Yi/1RmTtrWoMPoM30ry0HC/3Wc= Received: by 10.35.99.5 with SMTP id b5mr14765894pym; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.124.18 with HTTP; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 12:18:26 +0800 From: "Jiawei Ye" To: "Michael W. Lucas" In-Reply-To: <20060822010628.GA96258@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060822010628.GA96258@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: "the best" port update tool X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 04:18:27 -0000 On 8/22/06, Michael W. Lucas wrote: > Hi, > > After a database headache caused by my own doofusity, I've been > contemplating switching from portupgrade. (Hey, it's been a few > years, things could have changed.) Checking in /usr/ports/sysutils, > it seems that we have a whole bunch of different tools -- portmaster, > portmanager, portsman, and portupgrade. > > A search of the mailing list archive doesn't seem to lead me to a > clear successor or improvement upon portupgrade. Is portupgrade still > as good as it gets, or are we headed towards another tool any time > soon? > > Thanks, > ==ml Hi, personally I don't think any single one has a big win over the others. I have used portupgrade, portmanager, portmaster. Here are what I think of them: 1) Portupgrade It is a suite. Being a suite, portsclean, pkg_glob and these little utilities are very handy at keeping the ports tree as lean as possible. I especially like "pkg_deinstall -rR" when removing a large suite of software such as KDE or GNOME. Though portmanager/master has a "leaves" removal mode, they are not comparable to pkg_deinstall in this sense. Portupgrade builds its own database and depends on ruby, which has created some fluctuation in stability in recent months, but it also has the flexibility to define alternative dependancies in centralized configuration files. 2) Portmanager This started out as a rewrite of portupgrade in C, which proved to be quite fast but the development was somewhat more error-prone and IIRC it is no longer being developed. 3) Portmaster This is what I am using now, along with portconf to define per-port make flags and options. The only things I miss from portmaster are the pkg_deinstall ability and an easy way to define alternative dependancies. Speed doesn't seem to be a problem compared to portmanager though it is written as a shell script. One feature from portupgrade I would like to see in portmaster is the ability to go on upgrading other ports if one of them failed. That is my 2 cents worth, Jiawei Ye -- "Without the userland, the kernel is useless." --inspired by The Tao of Programming