Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 13 Mar 2005 15:02:55 -0500
From:      Randy Pratt <rpratt1950@earthlink.net>
To:        Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Gnome-210 upgrade comments
Message-ID:  <20050313150255.160fbb63.rpratt1950@earthlink.net>
In-Reply-To: <42348B7C.4030701@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20050313122613.337f7e4f.rpratt1950@earthlink.net> <42348B7C.4030701@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:50:36 -0500
Adam Weinberger <adamw@FreeBSD.org> wrote:

> Randy Pratt wrote:
> > If portaudit is being used and there are any installed ports which
> > have a security issue then gnome_upgrade.sh will fail.  The
> > gnome_upgrade.sh does a pkg_deinstall and later tries to pkg_install
> > which fails since there is a security issue with that port.
> 
> Hrmmn. You're not the first person to approach us about this. I wish 
> that there were a better way to do this... but lofi suggested that we 
> add DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES to the build environment.
> 
> I wish that there were a way to do this without having to disable 
> vulnerability checking for people who have explicitly called for it,
> but  it does seem the simplest and most functional workaround.
> 
> I'll commit that to gnome_upgrade.sh.

Thanks!  I think its a reasonable thing to do.  Most people that use
portaudit understand about their options to remove a port or assess
the extent of their vulnerability and decide to keep it.  I think
its best to leave portaudit out of the picture for upgrades like
this.  I also disable portaudit for normal portupgrades myself since its
the same situation.

> > I noticed that when the gnome_update.sh script would stop that
> > quite a few packages that had been installed were still missing.
> > Being a bit more cautious, I always used the -restart option for
> > the script since I wasn't sure if starting the script fresh would
> > reinstall those packages.
> 
> *nod* that's what the -restart option is there for. If you had re-run 
> the script from the beginning, you wouldn't have gotten your 
> applications back. I wish that there were a way to make this clearer.
> Do  you have any suggestions on how to make sure that people
> understand that  if something fails, they need only to correct that
> build problem (or  remove the offending port from the upgrade list)
> and use the -restart  option?

Nothing other than a message at the point it stops comes to mind.  I
do like the commit that gives you a ports list to use when restarting
the script.  That could be a very handy feature.  

I had looked thru the script after the first stop and realized what
was happening with the pkg_deinstall.  This is one of the reasons
that I also make backups of /var/db/pkgs before starting any
upgrade process.  I like to have a way to get back to where I was if
needed.

Something needs to be there to alert users.. maybe just to go read
the update faq and have an entry there where it could be explained
more fully about handling "broken" ports.  I'd not burden the script
with too much though.

I didn't have much problem getting things going, but newer users
may not find it as easy.  The changes you made already improved the
chances.

Thanks again!

Randy
-- 



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050313150255.160fbb63.rpratt1950>