Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 22:46:31 +0100 From: John Marino <freebsdml@marino.st> To: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> Cc: Mathias Picker <mathiasp@mathiaspicker.net>, Peter Jeremy <peter@rulingia.com>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Removing documentation Message-ID: <56BBAFB7.9080509@marino.st> In-Reply-To: <CAN6yY1tuKNjJEfmhN9u8j6MfFKz=wvSwyX%2BcOiBPwnOL7PNA3Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <56B754A8.3030605@marino.st> <20160208064305.GB63030@server.rulingia.com> <56B8454F.8060605@marino.st> <1454923852.4807.19.camel@mathiaspicker.net> <56B8662A.2050502@marino.st> <CAN6yY1tuKNjJEfmhN9u8j6MfFKz=wvSwyX%2BcOiBPwnOL7PNA3Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2/10/2016 10:15 PM, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > The stale configuration file issue has me a bit confused. The man page > does not make it clear just what makes a config "stale". All of my ports > are up to date as of 11:00 UTC this morning. As far as I know, all of > the configs are "current", although the actual config run may have been > for a much older version. "synth status shows 46 cases. I looked at one > (sysutils/tmux) and the options listed by "make showconfig" are no > different from those in the current Makefile, so I don't understand why > they are stale. Stale isn't the right word. You could use "invalid" or "obsolete" instead. The saved configuration does not match the current port. Imagine a month ago you run "make config". It saves the status of the 4 options on this imaginary port. Now imagine any of the following happening to the port. A) An option is added B) An option is removed C) An option default changed. D) Any other option configuration changed. Now the month-old saved configuration doesn't match the port. See the problem? Synth is the *only* tool that detects this. The rest keep using the old configuration the best they can, resulting in hard to track down bugs. Removing the saved configuration solves the problem; then Synth uses the defaults. Running "make config" also solves the problem, the configuration will match the port again. > I also have found at least one thing portmster can do that synth can't, > but I expect pkg can, so I won't complain about it until I have tried > using pkg to list all top-level ports (nothing depends on them) to use > to re-install all ports. I could list all ports, it's just that this is > a much longer list and portmaster did the job nicely with a simple > example in the man page. You don't need to list all the ports. Like you said, "pkg prime-list > my.list" and there's your top level. Or "synth upgrade" system and upgrade everything. Either approach works. The tight integration with pkg is helpful. > And, please, everyone, let's stop with the silly statements like "the > Handbook should be limited to the base system" or "a maintainer needs to > be able to fix all PRs". "All" is literal. Nobody expects all PRs to be valid. It's a moot point anyway, Torsten is now officially the maintainer (based on faith I guess) so for now there's no issue. Let's hope he is successful. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56BBAFB7.9080509>