From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 3 23:57:58 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BF6E16A41F for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 23:57:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF78343D55 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 23:57:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com) Received: from frontend1.internal (mysql-sessions.internal [10.202.2.149]) by frontend1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB21DD1DF19 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:57:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.151]) by frontend1.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 03 Dec 2005 18:57:55 -0500 X-Sasl-enc: xrNHjgtm3ply+vUUeAZeKAq/Tyc56roxou/hs7vla8X6 1133654274 Received: from gumby.localdomain (88-104-197-14.dynamic.dsl.as9105.com [88.104.197.14]) by frontend2.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A22AE571431 for ; Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:57:53 -0500 (EST) From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 23:57:50 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.3 References: <000d01c608c0$631632a0$2401a8c0@XGISH> <20051203205605.75367bfe@loki> In-Reply-To: <20051203205605.75367bfe@loki> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200512032357.52876.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> Subject: Re: How often portupgrades? 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: Sat, 03 Dec 2005 23:57:58 -0000 On Saturday 03 December 2005 19:56, Joerg Pernfuss wrote: > Everybody has to figure out that one for himself, so, here is my > rule of thumb: > > Upgrade your ports only when you need to. > > If all installed ports work fine and a new version doesn't introduce > some functionality you simply need to have, why update? > Just for the sake of updateing? No, because it's far less trouble to upgrade frequently than to have to spend time working out when you need to upgrade. Even Microsoft now sees that running for long periods without updates, just because the applications work, is a bad idea. I have a script that synchronizes my ports tree, tells me what ports are old, and displays a diff comparing UPDATING to an older version. A second script runs portmanager with nice. How difficult is that? Any reasonably new pc should be able to build in the background without significant impact on desktop performance.