From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jul 31 23:27:34 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8282F1065672 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:27:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx21.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2788A8FC18 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 28379 invoked by uid 399); 31 Jul 2010 23:27:32 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO lap.dougb.net) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 31 Jul 2010 23:27:32 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4C54B162.4000509@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 16:27:30 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.7) Gecko/20100713 Thunderbird/3.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Wolfskill References: <20100731120027.GN12818@albert.catwhisker.org> In-Reply-To: <20100731120027.GN12818@albert.catwhisker.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Efficiency & correctness for port version upgrades X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 23:27:34 -0000 On 07/31/10 05:00, David Wolfskill wrote: > I have been using portmaster for updating the installed ports on > may machines -- thanks, Doug! My pleasure. :) > I'm in the habit of updating on a daily basis -- directly after the > "smoke-test" boot of a newly-rebuilt stable/7 (before I go on to > build stable/8). > > This morning, I noticed the (20100730) entry in UPDATING on www/neon28 > -> www/neon29, so I made sure to complete that before doing the > "svn update" on my stable/8 working directory. [This is one place > where having the revision control system in ports, vs. base, is a > bit of a nuisance -- but that's off-topic for this note.] > > The instructions given for portmaster were: > > Portmaster users: > portmaster -o www/neon29 www/neon28 > portmaster -r neon29- > > which is fine, in that it works. > > However: It also causes www/neon29 to be built twice; I cannot > help but question the extent to which this is actually desired. One disadvantage (or is it an advantage? I'm never sure) of the fact that portmaster does not maintain state between runs is behavior like you're seeing here. To answer your question, assuming that everything went well with the -o command, there is no reason that portmaster would have to build the port again. The -r option needs an up to date +REQUIRED_BY, which is a side effect of (re)building it; but the above could just as easily be written: portmaster -o www/neon29 www/neon28 portmaster --check-depends portmaster `cat /var/db/pkg/neon29-0.29.3_2/+REQUIRED_BY` I often get the request for this feature (a -r that doesn't rebuild the port) but have never found the time to work on it. I'll try to get around to it soonish. Doug -- Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/ Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso