From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 18 19:31:12 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAA6F5EB for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from winston.madpilot.net (winston.madpilot.net [78.47.75.155]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B2631AC0 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:31:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from winston.madpilot.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by winston.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3fTBxq1JSCzFTB3; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:31:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=madpilot.net; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :references:subject:subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:from :date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mail; t=1392751868; x=1394566269; bh=fd7ogIYHy5SCmipU4KC+zSdh5O3GIw2L1ZZ8SZJz+Hw=; b= Kns3QoAhK7duS8pAdaizkkAyRLuR7hfbzVxMQQlcj0PN/qyRzw/Bq8PxlEl9WJ+7 yUMank5Rm89mAzk+H81Y/7a0U1d5lS4nmPBHBQ+viPeSzu5M/hFRyThO+5rNPfUZ W8mznYnEIR0itAwsEq7Opjitq4hnliuc9km/F7WY0iQ= Received: from winston.madpilot.net ([127.0.0.1]) by winston.madpilot.net (winston.madpilot.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QpEjv4SI3ytY; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:31:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from marvin.madpilot.net (micro.madpilot.net [88.149.173.206]) by winston.madpilot.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:31:08 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5303B4FC.1030207@madpilot.net> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 20:31:08 +0100 From: Guido Falsi User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: Upgrading a Port on 8.2 References: <20140218134344.07d1b0fa@X220.alogt.com> <89558292-BAD3-46B1-82E5-63501340AE0B@lafn.org> <20140218155418.35f11ef5@X220.alogt.com> <530361E1.3010904@madpilot.net> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "ports@freebsd.org" , Doug Hardie , Erich Dollansky X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 19:31:12 -0000 On 02/18/14 18:26, Kevin Oberman wrote: > On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Guido Falsi > wrote: > > On 02/18/14 08:54, Erich Dollansky wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:51 -0800 > > Hi, > > > > Doug Hardie > wrote: > > > >> > >> On 17 February 2014, at 21:43, Erich Dollansky > >> > wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:07:43 -0800 > >>> Doug Hardie > wrote: > >>> > >>>> I have an older, but basically clean, install of 8.2 on a > >>>> production system. It has a few ports that were installed back > >>>> when 8.2 was new. However, I need to add pdftk. Pkg_add did that > >>>> nicely. HOwever, it added version 1.44. The history for pdftk > >>>> shows that a major problem was fixed in 1.45 and I am encountering > >>>> that problem and need to upgrade. Portupgrade pdftk does > >>>> nothing. It seems to decide that the latest version is 1.44. > >>>> However, on a 9.2 system, I get a much higher version number. Is > >>>> there any way to determine if 1.44 is the latest version that will > >>>> run with 8.2 or is there another way I need to upgrade to ports > >>>> files? Its my understanding that cvsup is no longer with us. > >>> > >>> how I understand your problem, the behaviour of the machine is > >>> normal as you kept the old ports tree. > >>> > >>> If you would like to have a newer version of a port, you would have > >>> to update the ports tree first. The big but is then that you will > >>> have to update all installed ports too and then install the program > >>> you need. > >>> > >>> If you have real bad luck, this could force you even to upgrade from > >>> 8.2 to 8.4. So, be careful. > >> > >> Thats what I expected, but the question remains: how? Cvsup I > >> believe is no longer with us and purtupgrade apparently doesn't do > >> that either. > > > > I would suggest that you take ftp to download the current ports tree. > > It contains then a current svn. You would not need svn after this as > > the ports are downloaded by using fetch. > > > > Of course, for further updates, I would recommend moving to svn. > > This is more a personal opinion, but for general production use(not > development) portsnap is a much better choice than subversion. portsnap > is usually not more than one hour behind the subversion repository, so, > if you don't really need the latest changes, it's quite fresh and much > faster at downloading updates. It's also included in base also on older > releases (10 and up have svnlite included in base too). > > just an opinion though. > > > In general, I agree wholeheartedly. > > There is one potential issue with using portsnap that will only be > significant to a very few, but might unpleasantly surprise someone. > > Unlike svn, portsnap will overwrite the ports tree and eliminate any > local modifications. Most people don't have any of these, so for most, > this is not an issue. People just need to be aware of it if they do as > the files are gone after running portsnap, making recovery a pain. I agree, but for people who really need to keep local modofications to the ports tree I'd suggest using ports-mgmt/portshaker in conjunction with their VCS of choice(or plain directories...) -- Guido Falsi