From owner-freebsd-arch Fri Jul 12 18:28:13 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C5E737B400 for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 18:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.netcologne.de (smtp.netcologne.de [194.8.194.112]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 885AB43E5E for ; Fri, 12 Jul 2002 18:28:10 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tmseck-lists@netcologne.de) Received: from localhost (xdsl-213-168-116-217.netcologne.de [213.168.116.217]) by smtp.netcologne.de (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g6D1S5Ut028470 for ; Sat, 13 Jul 2002 03:28:05 +0200 (MEST) Received: (qmail 1440 invoked by uid 1001); 13 Jul 2002 01:17:50 -0000 Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 03:17:50 +0200 From: Thomas Seck To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <20020713011750.GA755@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> References: <20020706220511.GA88651@scoobysnax.jaded.net> <3D27A296.D58FB4B4@softweyr.com> <20020712121427.GD3678@lummux.tchpc.tcd.ie> <20020712144854.GA756@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Organization: private site in Germany X-PGP-KeyID: DF46EE05 X-PGP-Fingerprint: A38F AE66 6B11 6EB9 5D1A B67D 2444 2FE1 DF46 EE05 Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * Greg Lewis (glewis@eyesbeyond.com): > On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 04:48:54PM +0200, Thomas Seck wrote: > > * Robert bobb Crosbie (bobb+freebsd-arch@redbrick.dcu.ie): > > > > > I built apache2 with ``WITH_SUEXEC=yes'', then after the chunking thing > > > I did a ``portupgrade apache'', apache no longer works, scratched head > > > for a while until I rememberd how I buile it origionally. > > > > portupgrade can handle this. /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf.sample tells > > you how to do it. > > Thats both of the problems: > > (a) portupgrade isn't part of the standard package system. > (b) I have to do it. I already told the packaging system what I wanted > when I built the port, I shouldn't have to tell it again. The person I was replying to explicitly claimed that he wedged his apache update with portupgrade. Had he bothered to read the sample configuration or the documentation, he would have quickly learned how to avoid this. But I agree with you. A tool like portupgrade should not exist (and it should not have been written in Ruby - yet another dependency to track). The inability of the present ports and package system to maintain a consistent package database is apalling. The way dependencies are recorded is plain broken. In my opinion when specify a dependency, the minimum working requirement should be specified (e.g. 'gmake 3.79.1, do not care about VERSION or REVISION'). The package installer should decide at installation time via a package db lookup whether a locally installed package fulfills the minimum requirement and record the dependencies according to what was actually found on the system. When a depending package is not present or outdated, a recursive update should be done. The same applies for the ports system. At present, the dependencies in the package db reflect the state of the ports tree at build time but not the state of packages present on the system. -- Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message