From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 25 16:48:31 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4ED1065672 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:48:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from DStaal@usa.net) Received: from mail.magehandbook.com (173-8-4-45-WashingtonDC.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.8.4.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD178FC12 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:48:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from www.magehandbook.com (mail.darkmindweb.com [192.168.1.100]) by mail.magehandbook.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3WLbtJ1Wryz15r for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:48:24 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 12:48:24 -0400 From: Daniel Staal To: Mail-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <20120625154719.97935.qmail@joyce.lan> References: <20120625154719.97935.qmail@joyce.lan> Message-ID: <618a9c5055f8952c55e0004eac6b3aea@mail.magehandbook.com> X-Sender: DStaal@usa.net User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/RCMAIL_VERSION Subject: Re: portupgrade -- is there a way to only build and update ports that actually NEED it? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: DStaal@usa.net List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:48:31 -0000 On 2012-06-25 11:47, John Levine wrote: >>You would think there's an option to portupgrade that says "don't >> upgrade >>every single package I've got, but if somewhere in the dependency >> chain I >>need a newer version of a thing, then do it." > > The problem is that the versioning in the ports system doesn't > distinguish between upgrades that present interface changes and > upgrades that are just nits, new features, or minor bug fixes. > Port makefiles can contain version dependency info, e.g., this > port needs at least version N.M of package X, but few of them do. > > This has bitten me in the past with PHP and pcre. In fact, PHP5 > won't work with old versions of pcre, but the PHP port maintainer > refuses to put in version dependency info, because he thinks that > every port should be up to date all the time. There's also the issue of things like Perl modules - most of them will just work, even with a newer version of perl, but a few have sections that need to be compiled against perl itself. So if you update the Perl port, you need to at least recompile those. (I'm simplifying a bit.) But there is no good way to mark in general which ports will 'just work' with an updated dependency, and which care what version of the dependency was installed when they were compiled. This is separate from versioned dependencies: Again to use Perl modules as an example, DBI for instance is will work with any version of perl since 5.8 or so - but if you change which version of perl you are using you'll need to recompile and reinstall. Rebuilding everything is a bit overkill, but it beats missing one that needed to be rebuilt. Daniel T. Staal --------------------------------------------------------------- This email copyright the author. Unless otherwise noted, you are expressly allowed to retransmit, quote, or otherwise use the contents for non-commercial purposes. This copyright will expire 5 years after the author's death, or in 30 years, whichever is longer, unless such a period is in excess of local copyright law. ---------------------------------------------------------------