Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:35:14 +0000 From: Arthur Chance <freebsd@qeng-ho.org> To: Lorenzo Salvadore <phascolarctos@protonmail.ch>, FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Replacing base commands with pkg versions Message-ID: <e535aab1-1202-a032-d875-069da9f8e0a6@qeng-ho.org> In-Reply-To: <2WSWeqA769U9_j-YlfypjYKPgycGgCJH_5-w2PzJSegmBaHtZtTie7Kht_IANZU2s9xDJSE8kiDBP_9EvUj7ccQa1uevCPPiyoOAIm03fPo=@protonmail.ch> References: <b0671230-ef4f-3337-71c6-d23bdfd3aff8@qeng-ho.org> <2WSWeqA769U9_j-YlfypjYKPgycGgCJH_5-w2PzJSegmBaHtZtTie7Kht_IANZU2s9xDJSE8kiDBP_9EvUj7ccQa1uevCPPiyoOAIm03fPo=@protonmail.ch>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 29/01/2019 12:31, Lorenzo Salvadore via freebsd-questions wrote: >> 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 pkg > 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. In this case I specifically want to disable the base commands, and want them to be disabled under all circumstances, hence the suggestions of chmod -x, etc. -- Always learn from the mistakes of others, because you won't live long enough to learn from making all possible mistakes yourself.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?e535aab1-1202-a032-d875-069da9f8e0a6>