From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 23 02:57:01 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1929F16A417 for ; Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:57:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06+RO=f6cc4b1f@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from turtle-out.mxes.net (turtle-out.mxes.net [216.86.168.191]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2AE113C465 for ; Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:57:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd06+RO=f6cc4b1f@mlists.homeunix.com) Received: from mxout-04.mxes.net (mxout-04.mxes.net [216.86.168.179]) by turtle-in.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32739163F6B for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:39:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com. (unknown [87.81.140.128]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3280AD04FF for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:38:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:38:53 +0000 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20071223023853.11ab60e6@gumby.homeunix.com.> In-Reply-To: <1922FF4D9B0F57F56811A4DC@paul-schmehls-powerbook59.local> References: <221c791e0712220839v67a02e78q7cd5519f9b05a210@mail.gmail.com> <200712230119.30705.peter.schuller@infidyne.com> <1922FF4D9B0F57F56811A4DC@paul-schmehls-powerbook59.local> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.3; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Updating ports X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 02:57:01 -0000 On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:47:52 -0600 Paul Schmehl wrote: > --On December 23, 2007 1:19:21 AM +0100 Peter Schuller > wrote: > > > > In particular, given a re-build (e.g. upgraded) port X, all ports > > depending on X will also be re-built regardless of whether that is > > required according to the dependency relation. This is handled in > > such a way that it is not dependent on the entire procedure > > completing in one session, as you are with portupgrade (meaning > > it's restartable, as mentioned above). > > > > I don't understand this statement. I have killed portupgrade on > numerous occasions, both locally and remotely, and have never had a > problem restarting later. Something like portupgrade -fr perl is pretty hard to restart efficiently. > > In practice, I find this is the most useful upgrading method. I have > > never been able to use portupgrade for more than a week or two on a > > real machine without running into issues (stale dependencies, > > failed builds due to weak dependency information, etc). > > > > I *really* don't understand this. I can count on one hand the number > of times that I've run into dependency problems with portupgrade, and > all of those were addressed in /usr/port/UPDATING or by simply > deinstalling and reinstalling the port in question. It was really intended to handle major upgrades where multiple UPDATING instructions run together. And back in the days when Gnome upgrades involved wrapping portupgrade in a shell script run in single-user mode with a 50:50 chance of success, portmanager just took it in its stride. I think it is a useful approach because it trades a lot of cpu cycle for me not having to sober-up and think about things - and that always a win. Unfortunately, it's gone without developer support for too long now and I'm getting a bit wary about it.