Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:01:59 -0500 From: Eric <heli@mikestammer.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Installing and upgrading ports Message-ID: <4534FE77.3000201@mikestammer.com> In-Reply-To: <20061017104115.B2E4.GERARD@seibercom.net> References: <eh2je9$ed2$1@sea.gmane.org> <20061017104115.B2E4.GERARD@seibercom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gerard Seibert wrote: > On Tuesday October 17, 2006 at 08:47:27 (AM) Jonathan Arnold wrote: > >> I'm confused - what is sort of the consensus pick for "best" port >> tool? Usually, I just cd /usr/ports/xxxx/yyyy and do a 'make install clean', >> but I've also tried portmanager and portupgrade, but I'm not sure when to >> prefer one to another. Should I stick with one? Will mixing & matching >> confuse things? portupgrade seems to take a lot longer than portmanager. >> And where does the pkgdb command fit in? > > You could always do a 'man pkgdb' to get information regarding that > utility. As far as 'portmanager' vs portupgrade' go, I think that it > really boils down to your own preference. I usually prefer > 'portmanager'; however, I still use 'portupgrade' on occasion. There is > no know problem that I am aware of that arises from using one and then > the other on you system. If you really want to rebuild your system > applications I feel that 'portmanager -f -u' probably does a more > through job than 'portupgrade'; but again that is just my opinion. > > i find portmaster > all. give it a whirl. No dependencies, its actively maintained, etc.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4534FE77.3000201>