From owner-freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Wed Sep 16 20:58:31 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 216EE9CEB5E for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 20:58:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mfv@bway.net) Received: from smtp2.bway.net (smtp2.bway.net [216.220.96.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2B7310DE for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 20:58:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mfv@bway.net) Received: from gecko4 (host-216-220-115-228.dsl.bway.net [216.220.115.228]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: m1316v@bway.net) by smtp2.bway.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CC6995879 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:58:29 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bway.net; s=mail; t=1442437109; bh=GKRvJTUzPIgu+GfL7CIPFONI07tMqJIzOIFvnwkb4B8=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Reply-To; b=VC1R0FeLIM9SsjpcASjluZurMut0Q2LQoUWqy7xXaFlNCK/aDQecualjKdFBWfuPs Ro1uZ6+mtVOUj3l/ZECJNn4BwwngCTFpVyI3+nLo5ZLGFMMPRomzPSx+TnUXaLvpGG Fyu51Ww+01NZlG5nOIh7L32zHm797EIsnmvElW18= Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 16:58:29 -0400 From: mfv To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: Suggestion to add build/revision number to "pkg stats" Message-ID: <20150916165829.46ba52f6@gecko4> Reply-To: mfv@bway.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 20:58:31 -0000 Hello, This following message is sent a second time as the first was inadvertently sent to freebsd-questions. Apologies to those who are members of both mailing lists. ---- I've been using pkg from an early release and have been very impressed with it ease of use. All but a handful of my programs are installed and upgraded with it. I only have a handful of programs with custom configurations and use portmaster to upgrade them. Before upgrading a port in the ports tree, I've read that it is best to make certain that the ports tree is in sync with the build number of the packages. This was achieved by modifying a script that I found on the web. However, this approach seems to be putting the horse before the cart. The build number is only available when the build begins, but the package upgrade is not possible until the build process ends many hours later. Moreover, it is also possible to update the port tree to a particular release and then do a follow up port upgrade to a different release. A simple solution would be to have the build number available as part of a port upgrade and made available in "pkg stats". Its output could look like this: Local package database: Installed packages: 780 Disk space occupied: 6 GiB Remote package database(s): Number of repositories: 1 Packages available: 24561 Unique packages: 24561 Total size of packages: 44 GiB Latest revision number: 123456 Even better would be an argument to "pkg stats" that would only output the revision number, say "pkg stats -n" After running "pkg upgrade", it would then be an easy to extract the build number of that particular upgrade and then sync the ports tree to that number using subversion or, my favourite, svnup. If I had a large number of machines to upgrade I would use poudriere within a jail but this seem to be overkill for a single computer. Many thanks for producing a well thought out set of programs. Cheers ... __O _ \<,_ Marek (+)/ (+) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~