From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 16 11:20:19 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 TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 843FD49E for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:20:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 426911101 for ; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:20:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.104.138]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Y0pC6-0000QP-RN for freebsd-stable@freebsd.org; Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:17:36 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: I do not quite understand why a BIND upgrade needs to touch soo much. References: <548F4F62.4020308@digiware.nl> <548F5C6F.7040309@digiware.nl> <548F6AA1.5000407@digiware.nl> Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:17:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Ronald Klop" Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <548F6AA1.5000407@digiware.nl> User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.17 (Win32) X-Authenticated-As-Hash: 398f5522cb258ce43cb679602f8cfe8b62a256d1 X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Spam-Level: / X-Spam-Score: -0.2 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Scan-Signature: 1f72ff50073f138f9668c095d6f579a1 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, 16 Dec 2014 11:20:19 -0000 On Tue, 16 Dec 2014 00:11:29 +0100, Willem Jan Withagen wrote: > On 15-12-2014 23:26, Brandon Allbery wrote: >> On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Willem Jan Withagen > >> Hm; I'd expect it to notice the new gettext and build that as well, >> since >> the new bind might depend on changes in it (it has no way of knowing >> that >> in this case it's safe). OTOH this explains some of the screw cases that >> portuprade used to get me into, which are why I use portmaster these >> days.... > > augh, that is something to check. I've been using portinstall/upgrade > for a serious time. Did have some awkward moments, but always consider > them pilot-error... > >> Still leaves the point that 'pkg upgrade bind99' removes packages >>> without reinstalling those. The only alternatives are: >>> - pkg upgrade, and everything is upgraded >>> - capture the list of deletion, and manually re-add them after >>> the upgrade >>> >> >> This comes of prebuilt packages. In theory, a poudriere setup could be >> managed so that you updated only the bind99 Makefile. If you're relying >> on >> the standard packages, or updating a poudriere ports tree without >> checking >> /usr/ports/UPDATING first, you have no way to limit the update and get a >> bind99 package built against the old gettext; you have little choice >> but to >> upgrade everything. > > This calls for something in /etc/crontab like: > ( diff -N /usr/src/UPDATING ~/tmp/UPDATING || cp /usr/src/UPDATING > ~/tmp/UPDATING ) > What I us to get alerted when /usr/src/UPDATING gets changed. People can put this in their RSS reader for alerts of /usr/ports/UPDATING: http://updating.versia.com/atom/ports Or variations of http://updating.versia.com/atom/stable-10 for /usr/src/UPDATING. Regards, Ronald.