Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:28:56 +0200 From: Ion-Mihai Tetcu <itetcu@people.tecnik93.com> To: Vizion <vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> Cc: Wesley Shields <wxs@csh.rit.edu>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: UPDATING - needs updating? Message-ID: <20051121232856.064c5cfa@it.buh.tecnik93.com> In-Reply-To: <200511211306.01679.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> References: <200511210839.56424.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> <20051121191335.GA56240@csh.rit.edu> <20051121225729.5c08a18d@it.buh.tecnik93.com> <200511211306.01679.vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 13:06:00 -0800 Vizion <vizion@vizion.occoxmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 21 November 2005 12:57, the author Ion-Mihai Tetcu > contributed to the dialogue on- > Re: UPDATING - needs updating?: > > >On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 14:13:35 -0500 > > > >Wesley Shields <wxs@csh.rit.edu> wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 08:39:55AM -0800, Vizion wrote: > >> > Hi > >> > > >> > I have noticed that some earlier notices relating to some ports > >> > in UPDATING appear as though they have been made out of data by > >> > newer notices (e.g kde 20050804 seems to replace 20050324) and > >> > sometimes the instructions conflict with one another. While I > >> > presuime the latest notice always takes precedence I wonder if > >> > it would be possible to have notices that are no longer current > >> > removed from UPDATING. > >> > >> I think this is probably a bad idea, simply from a historical > >> perspective. If I wanted to chase down a bug that was available > >> only for a specified time period I would like to know the > >> corresponding UPDATING entries. > > > >there are enough old machines out there for which the "old" > >instructions still apply; in some cases it might not be able to > >update w/o intermediary steps. > > Interesting perspective.. > > You have got me wondering if a web interface could be used to drag > relevant data from UPDATING based upon the output from pkg_info? Hmm. I don't see this being a high priority. Your web interface should also look at depends; if installed ports are very out-of-date it's possible that one port mentioned in the file will depend on an other; and you'll want to check MOVED too. What it would be really nice in regard of automatic processing of UPDATING is to have CATEGORY/PORTNAME listed on AFFECTS list. I.e.: 20051105: AFFECTS: users of x11-toolkits/qt33 - this one I can easily grep (I have the date and the port) 20051105: AFFECTS: all users of gnome/glib/gtk - this one is much harder to process; I keep ports fairly updated on my machines because I don't want to run in this king of trouble, but this is not always possible. -- IOnut - Unregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" BOFH excuse #441: Hash table has woodworm
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051121232856.064c5cfa>