Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:55:15 -0900 From: Beech Rintoul <beech@alaskaparadise.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org>, Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: binary patches? Message-ID: <200703141555.36585.beech@alaskaparadise.com> In-Reply-To: <20070314230041.GA96282@thought.org> References: <20070314155326.GA23363@thought.org> <45F81DCF.6050309@FreeBSD.org> <20070314230041.GA96282@thought.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--nextPart2087597.t8U6J7WO62
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
On Wednesday 14 March 2007 15:00, Gary Kline said:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 05:07:43PM +0100, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
> > Gary Kline schrieb:
> > > Regarding most (or many) of the port changes--say, upgrading
> > > foo-2.1.9_5 to foo-2.1.9_6, if the upgrade could be done by
> > > downloading a binary diff file, could the resulting
> > > /usr/local/bin/foo-2.1.9_6 be achieved by downloading a
> > > relatively small binary patch? Seems to me that smaller scale
> > > upgrades could be done this way in preference to re-compiling
> > > ports or downloading entire pacakes. --Same would go for any
> > > dependencies.
> > >
> > > Why is this a bad idea!
> > >
> > > gary
> >
> > The final form of actual binaries depend on a lot of things, e.g.
> > which version of dependency you compiled with, which CFLAGS you
> > have used, what options the port you built it. Some of these
> > applies to packages as well, that's why I prefer ports over
> > packages at all. E.g. let's see lang/php5. It does not have the
> > apache module enabled by default. If it were, then the problem
> > comes up with Apache versions. IIRC, 2.2 is the default now, but
> > what if you use 2.0? How would you install php for your apache
> > version from package? The situtation has been already pretty
> > complicated with packages if you have higher needs for fine
> > tuning, but you can use them if you don't have special needs.
> > Binary diffs would be so complicated that I think this way we
> > could really not follow.
> >
> > If you need simplicity at all, use portupgrade with packages. It
> > has an option (don't remember which one) you can use to make it
> > fetch packages instead of building from source. Nowadays, this
> > network traffic should not be a real problem, I think.
>
> You've brought up a lot of things I didn't consider; this was
> part of the reason for my post. It seems to me that there would
> need to be some simple ground rules from the binary patches I'm
> got in mind. The *default* CFLAGS in the port would match those
> in the patch is one place to start.
>
> Obviously, this could get way out of hand very quickly. Two of
> my slowest servers (one 400MHz, 192M RAM) were rebuilding parts
> of the KDE suite; the new kdelib-3.5.6 [??] just finished and I
> already scp'd it over to my more beefy platform. Once I've got
> all my servers up to date, it may not be that hard to keep them
> current. You're right that bandwidth isn't a problem--um, in
> most places {{ clearing my throat! }}. Bandwidth isn't the main
> issue. It's time.
>
> cheers!
>
> gary
>
> > Regards,
> > Gabor
This issue comes up about every six months. If you google the mailing=20
list you will find extensive discussion about why binary upgrades are=20
a bad idea. If you want to upgrade using packages only=20
use 'portupgrade -PP'. Bear in mind it takes the package build=20
cluster a couple of weeks to catch up. For security reasons we=20
(maintainers) don't build packages and building binaries for every=20
possible configuration would place an extreme load on the build=20
cluster (not to mention the space required to host them all).
Beech
=2D-=20
=2D------------------------------------------------------------------------=
=2D-------------
Beech Rintoul - Port Maintainer - beech@alaskaparadise.com
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign | FreeBSD Since 4.x
\ / - NO HTML/RTF in e-mail | http://www.freebsd.org
X - NO Word docs in e-mail | Latest Release:
/ \ - http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.2R/announce.html
=2D------------------------------------------------------------------------=
=2D-------------
--nextPart2087597.t8U6J7WO62
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQBF+Itpp5D0B1NlT4URAo9XAJ9uGWTwwvNzU+s/xeRyOfQp2eaUuACePNMz
yNe65Aw1dxvlgsB/i+KIH8w=
=mqtc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart2087597.t8U6J7WO62--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200703141555.36585.beech>