From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 26 20:52:30 2010 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 BCCC0106566B for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 20:52:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A96E8FC0A for ; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 20:52:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o8QKqRfQ091449; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:52:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) with ESMTP id o8QKqQca091446; Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:52:27 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:52:26 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: Dick Hoogendijk In-Reply-To: <4C9F74DD.6000009@nagual.nl> Message-ID: References: <4C9F74DD.6000009@nagual.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 26 Sep 2010 14:52:27 -0600 (MDT) Cc: FreeBSD Subject: Re: port upgrading 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, 26 Sep 2010 20:52:30 -0000 On Sun, 26 Sep 2010, Dick Hoogendijk wrote: > I'm in doubt. I wanted to bring my ports collection uptodate, so I ran "csup > -L 2 /root/ports-supfile" and that updated my ports collection. At least, I > hope so. > > Then I started googling and found that cvsup is not recommended. Better tot > use portsnap (???) > And also portupgrade was a no go. I should be using portmaster. They are judgement calls. csup is one method, portsnap another. portsnap may be faster, and probably should be the default choice any more (lower bandwidth). portupgrade still works, and many of us still use it. For me, it's just that I almost know how to run portupgrade now, and portmaster didn't seem any better when I tried it. > Woh, I'm confused now. > Question: what is best used to have an up2date ports collection nowadays? > This system is FreeBSD8/amd64. This is an overview of what works for me: http://www.wonkity.com/~wblock/docs/html/portupgrade.html