Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 16:40:11 -0700 (MST) From: Dale Scott <dalescott@shaw.ca> To: Chris Stankevitz <chrisstankevitz@gmail.com> Cc: "cpet@sdf.org" <cpet@sdf.org>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Do I want to switch to the new pkg(8) format? Message-ID: <CB247B2C-32F4-4567-9FB9-124362BB6F17@shaw.ca> In-Reply-To: <CAPi0psvo6UOefnJczRkeQ5SpR2k0nSQ6h9Wq2cNyh5Jzr7xB2Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPi0psuei36LjMFT_B7DF3dWhTz=RK28r-kxKdyeNJx1YSapdg@mail.gmail.com> <7813720d20f4ad81c083db7695df728b.squirrel@ma.sdf.org> <alpine.BSF.2.11.1412261056240.60313@wonkity.com> <CAPi0psvo6UOefnJczRkeQ5SpR2k0nSQ6h9Wq2cNyh5Jzr7xB2Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Dec 26, 2014, at 2:57 PM, Chris Stankevitz <chrisstankevitz@gmail.com>=
wrote:
>=20
>> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> wrote=
:
>> No, both binary packages and ports require pkg now. It is the only
>> supported package management tool, and installing ports *is* installing
>> packages.
>=20
> Warren,
>=20
> Thank you for your replies. I appreciate how careful you are being
> with your language. Keeping in mind that my FreeBSD vocabulary is not
> up-to-snuff, can you explain how these two statements can both be
> simultaneously true:
>=20
> "pkg is the only supported package management tool (and installing
> ports *is* installing packages)" -Warren Block
>=20
> "portmaster is the recommended tool for upgrading installed ports"
> -Handbook section 5.5.3.1
>=20
>=20
> If both statement are indeed true, then I must conclude:
>=20
> 1. Upgrading ports is not a "package management" operation.
My thinking is that a) the ports system is how software is adapted to FreeB=
SD, b) applications can have build options (typically configured via "make =
config" before "make install"), and c) if you can live with the "default" o=
ptions, then installing pre-compiled packages ("pkg install foo") saves con=
siderable time.
If you are using pre-compiled packages, then "pkg upgrade" upgrades them. I=
f you are compiling from ports, postmaster is my preferred tool to upgrade =
("portmaster foo") (but there are other tools also). If you are using some =
packages and installing others by compiling from the ports tree, then you w=
ill have to "pkg lock" the ones you are compiling yourself to prevent "pkg =
upgrade" from upgrading them using pre-compiled packages (with the "default=
" options, not the options which you need, which necessitated you to compil=
e them yourself in the first place), upgrade the packages ("pkg upgrade"), =
then unlock, upgrade them with portmaster (which will respect your selected=
options), then "pkg lock" them again.
As someone else noted, pkg is getting smarter every day and will soon be ab=
le to sort out exactly how to upgrade (and may even be able to now).
>=20
> 2. There are many different "operations" you can do with ports and packag=
es.
>=20
> 3. Each "operation" might use a different tool. Sometimes pkg,
> portmaster, portsnap, make, cvs, pkg_, portsclean, portupgrade, etc.
Portsnap is a tool to quickly way update your ports tree, but you still hav=
e to compile a port yourself.
The cvs management tool was used for the freebsd operating system itself, b=
ut has now been replaced with Subversion (svn).
Portupgrade is an alternative tool to portmaster.
All the pkg_* tools have been replaced by pkg.
> Thank you again,
>=20
> Chris
All the flexibility was confusing when I started with freebsd, but it was s=
till less confusing than the differences between the Linux distro's. Google=
showed me the popular strategies, and then I just stuck with one.
Good luck!
Dale
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.o=
rg"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CB247B2C-32F4-4567-9FB9-124362BB6F17>