From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Tue Jan 29 12:31:16 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8680114BBEFB for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:31:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from phascolarctos@protonmail.ch) Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.protonmail.ch", Issuer "SwissSign Server Silver CA 2014 - G22" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20274849AA for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:31:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from phascolarctos@protonmail.ch) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:31:01 +0000 To: FreeBSD Questions From: Lorenzo Salvadore Reply-To: Lorenzo Salvadore Subject: Re: Replacing base commands with pkg versions Message-ID: <2WSWeqA769U9_j-YlfypjYKPgycGgCJH_5-w2PzJSegmBaHtZtTie7Kht_IANZU2s9xDJSE8kiDBP_9EvUj7ccQa1uevCPPiyoOAIm03fPo=@protonmail.ch> In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: X6az_D2smWSR8MT5MHqXnWF0upxehDyHia7Id1cbayHNBUkRu3CIeusDsZHiivIIjmaKB1_OofpALrRUYjNz3w==:Ext:ProtonMail MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on mail.protonmail.ch X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 20274849AA X-Spamd-Bar: ----- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-5.87 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; HAS_REPLYTO(0.00)[phascolarctos@protonmail.ch]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[protonmail.ch:s=default]; REPLYTO_EQ_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[protonmail.ch.dwl.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:185.70.40.0/24]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[protonmail.ch:+]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[mailsec.protonmail.ch,mail.protonmail.ch]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[protonmail.ch,quarantine]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.98)[-0.981,0]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; IP_SCORE(-1.78)[ipnet: 185.70.40.0/24(-4.90), asn: 19905(-3.92), country: US(-0.08)]; ASN(0.00)[asn:19905, ipnet:185.70.40.0/24, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[132.40.70.185.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:31:16 -0000 > What is the recommended way of dealing with the base versions of > commands when installing a package version instead? Should I chmod -x > the base executable(s), delete them or rename them? What happens if I > subsequently do a freebsd-update - do the base executables get > reinstated or are they ignored? > > The specific case I'm interested in is unbound under 11.2, but this > applies to a variety of programs (CUPS vs base lpr, or base vs pkg llvm > come to mind) and if there's any official guidance on this I've missed it= . I cannot give you an official answer, but if you always want to have the pk= g version getting precedence on the base version, I would reorder the PATH variable. If instead you want to mix versions, I would not change the base system, I would rather create aliases for the shell. Lorenzo Salvadore.