Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 07:28:18 +0100 From: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The ports are really funcional? Message-ID: <20111101072818.ddcfbd64.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <4eafef5a.xn0KmWlZlGCMzFaA%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <F2F10B45-7FDF-44F9-B8AC-529004722FF5@gmail.com> <CAHieY7Qr8d6JOMK2w2xDUxu19aw%2BzLxDQfTYgvv7S6YNmWo02g@mail.gmail.com> <20111031040545.cc7d874f.freebsd@edvax.de> <CAO6-GAeVNJDnmk68y3tv4nRrWAf-EbF0Rc2Ft2EQEjaLzmPnLA@mail.gmail.com> <557A48F1-B4A0-407D-A8F1-1502990AE31E@gmail.com> <20111031182528.619b9b83.freebsd@edvax.de> <j8mspj$b2g$1@dough.gmane.org> <4eafef5a.xn0KmWlZlGCMzFaA%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 01 Nov 2011 06:08:42 -0700, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > My experience is exactly the opposite. The biggest problem I've > had with ports came from trying to follow the recommended approach > of updating the tree after installing, before trying to build > anything. This is a _conditional_ suggestion. For those who follow a -STABLE branch, using a continuously updated ports tree, in combination with updating the OS and the installed applications, might sound more interesting than the opposite approach: Installing and _using_ a -RELEASE (and often only adding the security updates) and working with the "frozen" ports tree of that particular release. Note the difference of -RELEASE and -STABLE - you'll find similarities in handling the ports tree. There is no clear definition of "use _this_ on a server, use _that_ on a desktop"; individual updating and using habits are important here. > In retrospect, I'm not at all sure why anyone would be surprised > at this finding -- or why "update it first" would be recommended. > The ports tree is known to be buildable and self-consistent when > packages are built for a release, and that version of the tree > is distributed with the release. Correct. Especially for offline operations, this is an approach often recommended. > If something won't build on a > freshly-installed -RELEASE, but the build cluster _was_ able to > build the package, there pretty much has to be something wrong with > the local installation. And in that case, exchanging a non-compiling port (for whatever reason) with a binary package from the RELEASE set of archives is a possible way to solve the problem. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111101072818.ddcfbd64.freebsd>