Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 19:00:29 +0000 From: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portupgrade: the -P options rarely works Message-ID: <20080120190029.58c9e3b8@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <16143691-5D0B-4248-84BE-37FBDE40FEA5@mac.com> References: <70F64C4A-51CB-4301-B7C5-200FD8D5BC41@mac.com> <20080120002209.04e18225@gumby.homeunix.com> <16143691-5D0B-4248-84BE-37FBDE40FEA5@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 09:49:29 +0100 Giorgio Valoti <giorgio_v@mac.com> wrote: >=20 > On 20/gen/08, at 01:22, RW wrote: >=20 > > On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:35:42 +0100 > > Giorgio Valoti <giorgio_v@mac.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> I=E2=80=99ve noticed that using the -P option with portupgrade, which > >> should try to fetch the binary version of a package rarely works. > >> Most of the times it tries to fetch the package from the freebsd > >> site, it fails and then proceed to build it from the sources. > >> While I can expect from to time that a pre-compiled version of a > >> package to be unavailable, it surprises me to see this so many > >> times. > > > > Are you aware that you need to pick-up stable packages, rather than > > release packages, for portupgrade -P to work properly? >=20 > Well, no. What is the way to distinguish between stable and release? Packages are built per branch, but packages for release security branches are not generally updated. So if someone is using, say, 6.2 and wants updated packages, they set the PACKAGESITE variable to fetch 6-Stable packages instead. Try googling for the correct setting.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080120190029.58c9e3b8>