From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 19 18:05:28 2010 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 17713106564A for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:05:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk [81.187.76.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65DE38FC08 for ; Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from seedling.black-earth.co.uk (seedling.black-earth.co.uk [81.187.76.163]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o3JI46LM061815 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:04:06 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Message-ID: <4BCC9B15.4050803@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:04:05 +0100 From: Matthew Seaman Organization: Infracaninophile User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Joe Auty References: <4BCC8E8C.80406@netmusician.org> In-Reply-To: <4BCC8E8C.80406@netmusician.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.96 at happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_ALL, SPF_FAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Questions about port revision numbers, portsnap, csup X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:05:28 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 19/04/2010 18:10:36, Joe Auty wrote: > Hello, > > I've identified my pecl-APC install as being broken after upgrading to > PHP 5.3.2. According to the commit history listed here: > http://www.freshports.org/www/pecl-APC/ there is a fix out. However, > doing a portsnap fetch update does not seem to fetch this latest > revision to this port, after doing my portsnap it shows no updates are > available for the port although I'm pretty certain that I last > portsnapped before April 12. I'm assuming that portsnap only grabs a new > version of the portrevision number has been bumped? > > My questions: > > 1) If I were to csup my ports tree to force a fetch of this update, > would this break portsnap? > > 2) Is there a way to look at the commit history of the ports I have > installed in /usr/ports so that I can verify whether or not I have the > revision with this particular fix? Thus far I've been relying on > freshports.org and trusting that doing a portsnap will always fetch the > latest stuff visible on freshports.org, but now I'm not so sure... > > 3) Shouldn't the portrevision number be bumped whenever there is an > update? I always assumed that the _x suffixes indicated a portrevision > bump. Why was it not bumped for this pecl-APC fix? Human error? Is there > any other way I can force the download of this port, or is csup my best bet? The only change in the last update (12th April) to pecl-APC was the addition of files/patch-php_apc.c That's good in the sense that you can simply download that file from CVS and put it into the files sub directory if it isn't there already and then force a rebuild of the port to get the benefit. Note that running portsnap after doing that could blow away the patch file if portsnap really is missing it. However, I suspect that it is known to portsnap and that something else is wrong with your build. You could change to using csup rather than portsnap, but be aware that this pretty much means scrubbing all of your portsnap state. Indeed, for best results with csup, starting with an empty /usr/ports might be an idea -- I don't think that will be necessary, but I can't be certain. If you switch to csup, switching back to portsnap will definitely require you to re-download the ports tree and replace everything you had installed via csup. In any case, I don't think the problem you're experiencing is sufficient justification for making such a sweeping change -- both portsnap and csup are effective at what they do, and losing a whole file would be a pretty disastrous failure. Since the port revision number wasn't bumped on 12th April, you'll have to check the oldest date on files inside /var/db/pkg/pecl-APC-3.0.19 -- don't check the date on the directory itself: the normal operation of portupgrade(1) will modify it. The rule about PORTREVISION numbers is that they should be applied when the update causes a material difference in the state of the installed port. Fixing a problem that stops the port compiling at all doesn't usually count: some maintainers/committers might bump portrevision, others wouldn't. Cheers, Matthew - -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvMmxUACgkQ8Mjk52CukIyHJACfVrNIjL8p/CgY59e6S/xo+jX4 sNoAn2+7bEKxr42Ta5Jn7zbWEnKz5HUZ =Fevg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----