Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:14:37 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Cc: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de>, Thomas Backman <serenity@exscape.org>, Olivier SMEDTS <olivier@gid0.org>, FreeBSD current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Ken Smith <kensmith@cse.buffalo.edu> Subject: Re: HEADS-UP: Shared Library Versions bumped... Message-ID: <200907220814.38246.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20090721215201.GA61999@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <1248027417.14210.110.camel@neo.cse.buffalo.edu> <4A6628F0.6080802@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <20090721215201.GA61999@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 21 July 2009 5:52:01 pm Steve Kargl wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:45:36PM +0200, O. Hartmann wrote: > > > > I have another box (of many) running FreeBSD 8.0-BETA2/amd64 with 2 GB > > RAM and a Athlon64 2,2GHz CPU having 800(!) ports installed. Can you > > imagine how long this box will be occupied by 'portupgrade -af'? I guess > > 'cherry-picking' is the only solution. > > How many of those 800 ports are actually necessary and used? > It would be better to get generate a complete list of your > installed ports, use pkg_deinstall or pkg_delete to remove > all ports, and then selectively re-install ports that are > actually used. Xorg takes up ~200 ports alone (not including dependencies like perl, etc.) since the Xorg decided release engineering was too hard. Throw in things like KDE, OOo, Firefox, etc. for a desktop and you can get a fairly high package count. :-/ -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200907220814.38246.jhb>