Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 01:57:32 -0700 From: "Chris H." <fbsd@1command.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading question (issue?) - was:(no subject) Message-ID: <20060516015732.q4027orfkks44wwg@webmail.1command.com> In-Reply-To: <44691D54.2060704@greenmeadow.ca> References: <20060515165650.cau6rf2escws4owg@webmail.1command.com> <20060515170354.grxho1n0o48cgog4@webmail.1command.com> <44691D54.2060704@greenmeadow.ca>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format and has been PGP signed. --=_71t6z3iqicw8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, and thank you for your reply. Quoting Duane Whitty <duane@greenmeadow.ca>: > Chris H. wrote: >> Quoting "Chris H." <fbsd@1command.com>: >> >> Hello, >> I have a question as to accomplishing an upgrade of *only* what ports I >> already have installed. That is to say; I somewhat frequently suck down >> the latest source for system and ports for the release I run on my servers >> (RELENG_5_4 - soon to be 5_5) and usually rebuildworld/ kernel, and >> *painfully* >> the ports I already have installed. Which brings me to my issue; Is there >> any way to rebuild (upgrade) the ports I already have installed, and *only* >> the ports I already have installed? I have recently discovered portmaster. >> Which is heads-and-tails over portupgrade. But (from my personal knowlede/ >> experience) it doesn't provide a "one shot" command/ option to achieve my >> desired goal. Many times while upgrading one of the ports, it will fail >> during installation with the "HEY! this port is already installed! You may >> wish to cd to the ports directory and execute port deinstall, then port >> reinstall" What?! I'm *upgrading* (or at least trying) this port. :\ >> >> Anyway, thank you for all your time and consideration. >> >> --Chris H. >> > Hi Chris, > > Does portupgrade -a not work for you? Actually, for some reason I am frequently plagued with database (portsdb) problems that are difficult to reconcile. Every cvsup I perform is with the following command: cvsup -g -L 2 ports-supfile && portsdb -Uu && pkgdb -F However, I all to often run into conflicts in the database. So I found it (seemingly) more efficient to switch to portmaster (no database required). My other issue with portupgrade was it's perpensity to (seemingly) make arbitrary decisions to start down any and all paths possible to install any other possibly related libraries and ports. This occurred with my last session using it. I went from a 7gig installation base to a 15gig installation. That was the last straw for me. I had to wipe the disks and perform a fresh (re)install. I think it's my inability to reconcile the meaning of the -R option vs. the -r option. I can't make sense of them; -R --upward-recursive Act on all those packages required by the given packages as well. (When specified with -F, fetch recursively, including the brand new, uninstalled ports that an upgraded port requires) -r --recursive Act on all those packages depending on the given packages as well. I know these are my downfall (7Gb vs. 15Gb). I'm running servers here and have no need for every desktop bell and whistle available in the ports tree. I guess what I'm looking for is the option: +R --recurse-only Act on and retrieve *only* those applications and libraries that are absolutely _manditory_ to successfully upgrade the port(s). Seems a reasonable option, no? > > Actually, I've been thinking maybe the better way to accomplish > this goal is: > > Read /usr/ports/UPDATING As always; *prudent* advice. :) > pkgdb -F > script pre-update-all > portupgrade -an > exit > Read pre-update-all and fix potential conflicts > script update-all > portupgrade -aFR > portupgrade -a > exit > Read update-all for special instructions that went by during upgrade. > > > As for the problem with a port utility telling you to deinstall a previous > version, I've run into this as well. The problem is that the upgrade tools > upgrade versions of the same application. They can't upgrade across > different > editions of a port. As an example, Apache 1.35 to Apache 2.2. Ports > treat them > as different applications. Understood. This is not the trouble I experience. For example, I had Apache 1.3.4 and portaudit emailed me informing me that a security issue had been found in 1.3.4. So I waited a week till I figured the secure version had made it into CVS and performed cvsup to fetch a more recent ports tree. I then attempted to upgrade it. But if failed at the install phase with the Hey! this port is already installed, blah, blah... So I simply went to the ports/www/apache and performed port deinstall and went back and told the upgrade process to finish. This is only one example. I could site many others. I just figured that there was a new install standard and not all of the ports had been upgraded to the new standard, so as to conform and understand that they were being upgraded - a reinplace sort of thing. Anyway, I wanted to launch bsdwatch.NET this week. But I need to sync out the installed port base beforehand. As I want to migrate the server to 5_5 before I do (launch the site). So was looking for the most reliable and efficient method to accomplish this. The new site will keep me busy and I won't have alot of time to go through the whole install tree upgrading them 1 by 1. :) I'll give your suggestion a shot. In the worse case scenerio, I can just blow the disk away and replace it with the backup. But I'll hope for the best. :) Thanks again. --Chris H. > I think all the port utilities do this. > > > Best Regards, > > Duane Whitty > -- > duane@greenmeadow.ca > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- ----------------------------------------------------------------- FreeBSD 5.4-RELEASE-p12 (SMP - 900x2) Tue Mar 7 19:37:23 PST 2006 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// --=_71t6z3iqicw8 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: PGP Digital Signature Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBEaZP8XxK1cRs0zxkRAhoVAJ4iuxO6iy7IyZoVS2M+fFu1csKP5ACfcphi e2MHoPGwTfSVy9uj3ArUORk= =JMpL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_71t6z3iqicw8--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060516015732.q4027orfkks44wwg>