From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 23 09:44:10 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DCA8F9B; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:44:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hades.sorbs.net (hades.sorbs.net [67.231.146.201]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84F37C29; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:44:07 +0000 (UTC) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Received: from isux.com (firewall.isux.com [213.165.190.213]) by hades.sorbs.net (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.29.0 64bit (built Jul 9 2013)) with ESMTPSA id <0NCC00584LW6T300@hades.sorbs.net>; Tue, 23 Sep 2014 02:48:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <542140E4.6050605@sorbs.net> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 11:44:04 +0200 From: Michelle Sullivan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.24) Gecko/20100301 SeaMonkey/1.1.19 To: Florent Peterschmitt Subject: Re: pkg 1.3.8 requested but not available? References: <20140923083359.GA20383@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <54213713.7020200@sorbs.net> <542138B9.3060600@peterschmitt.fr> In-reply-to: <542138B9.3060600@peterschmitt.fr> Cc: "ports@freebsd.org" , FreeBSD Stable Mailing List X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 09:44:10 -0000 Florent Peterschmitt wrote: > Le 23/09/2014 11:02, Michelle Sullivan a écrit : > >> Baptiste Daroussin wrote: >> >>> [...] >>> You are using portupgrade so first upgrade pkg with portupgrade >>> >>> >>> >> Just a thought here - why (like .rpm and .deb - and the reason I hate >> them so much) are you making the package manager version a dependency of >> a package? I can understand if there are new features that you may need >> to use a later version to get those features, but making a package >> dependent on the package manager rather than displaying a warning that a >> feature is missing is the brain dead way that plagues upgrades for >> redhat and debian. Of course if your intent is to make FreeBSD into >> another Linux distro just with a different kernel, continue. >> >> > > What is the problem of upgrading the package manager first and then > upgrade the rest of the world without any problem? > > Not disagreeing with you... but making dependencies like this leads to everything relying on the package manager being a particular version.. which in my opinion is wrong... the package manager is not part of the software you're installing... and shouldn't be part of a dependency tree - particularly when building your own ports. *Every* time a Redhat and Debian system screwed up that I have had, was caused by the package manager needing to be updated before a particular package, then all the other dependent packages needed to be upgraded, and the libraries and you end up with the catch 22 of the package manager can't be installed because the package manager is too old and you end up with a half working system that needs to be re-installed because you needed to apply a security fix to a perl module....! Now FreeBSD has one advantage (currently) ... the package manager is not part of the OS, it in itself is a port.. however that has half changed already and in what, another month? it's going to be part of the OS... Yeah sure keep building pkg-static so it can be installed independently, but be aware that one does not want to get into dependency loops or having to upgrade everything just for one security fix - particularly when working with the ports tree and not the package manager... some people have production servers that need a security fix, not an upgrade of everything. -- Michelle Sullivan http://www.mhix.org/