Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:15:12 -0600 From: "Donald J. O'Neill" <donaldj1066@fastmail.fm> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Gert Cuykens <gert.cuykens@gmail.com> Subject: Re: perl and ports Message-ID: <200501242315.12888.donaldj1066@fastmail.fm> In-Reply-To: <20050125032510.GA82758@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <ef60af0905012416425fdc0a7d@mail.gmail.com> <200501242120.16504.donaldj1066@fastmail.fm> <20050125032510.GA82758@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 24 January 2005 09:25 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 09:20:16PM -0600, Donald J. O'Neill wrote:
> > On Monday 24 January 2005 06:54 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:42:24AM +0100, Gert Cuykens wrote:
> > > > Do we still need perl to make use of ports
> > > >
> > > > Just asking because it bugs me. I never use it and it just
> > > > takes up space and it is a security risc :P I want it gone :)
> > >
> > > Only if you want to do certain things like 'make index', but not
> > > for general use (this has been the case for years).
> > >
> > > Kris
> >
> > And if you want to install packages using the ports tree.
>
> Eh?
>
> > depend on installing packages only, ok. Of course, you have to wait
> > for them to be built.
> >
> > I just ran pkg_info -R perl-5.8.5, too many to count by hand.
>
> Well, yeah, but that's because you installed perl 5.8.5 or something
> that depends on it. If you use 4.x most such ports will be happy
> with the base system version of perl, and if you don't use 4.x then
> ports that don't require perl won't install it.
>
Yes, and that's my point Kris. Of the 537 ports that are installed on my=20
system, 318 of them require (have a dependency) perl-5.8.5 to run. What=20
about others that require it to build. So, if Gert, who is running=20
=46SBD5.3 on an amd64 system and has been building ports and using=20
portupgrade, removes perl-5.8.5 (does a forced removal) because he=20
can't see that it's used all over the place and thinks of it as a=20
security issue because of earlier perl versions. He's going to have a=20
big problem on his hands the first time he tries to use portupgrade and=20
finds a lot of decencies missing in his package database, and running=20
pkgdb -F is going to fix them.
I seem to also remember, at one time, having to do 'pkg_add -r cvsup'=20
and perl-5.8.5 was installed with it.
> Kris
It seems to me that the perl-5.8.5 is installed when FreeBSD 5.3=20
installed.=20
=46rom ports/UPDATING
20040204:
AFFECTS: 5.2-CURRENT20040204:
AFFECTS: 5.2-CURRENT users who started with a 5.2-RELEASE or older.
AUTHOR: obrien@FreeBSD.org
Change the default version of perl to 5.8. users who started with a=20
5.2-RELEASE or older.
AUTHOR: obrien@FreeBSD.org
Change the default version of perl to 5.8.
20040730:
AFFECTS: users of lang/perl5.8
AUTHOR: tobez@FreeBSD.org, mat@FreeBSD.org, marcus@FreeBSD.org
lang/perl5.8 has been updated to 5.8.5. you should update everything
depending on perl, that is:
* first, upgrade your perl5.8 installation.
* run "use.perl port", so that the system knows you have 5.8.5.
* now, run some magic incantations to upgrade all ports depending on=20
perl,
that is run something like :
portupgrade -f `(pkg_info -R perl-5.8.5 |tail +4; \
find /usr/local/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.[124] -type f -print0 \
| xargs -0 pkg_which -fv | sed -e '/: ?/d' -e 's/.*: //')|sort=20
=2Du`
This is likely to fail for a few ports, you'll have to upgrade=20
them
afterwards.
Please note, that this last step is, strictly speaking, not=20
necessary,
if you are upgrading from 5.8.4. But it is cleaner to do so=20
anyway.
It seems to me, removing perl, is not a good idea.
=2D-=20
Donald J. O'Neill
donaldj1066@fastmail.fm
I'm not totally useless,
I can be used as a bad example.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200501242315.12888.donaldj1066>