From owner-freebsd-stable Thu Feb 8 7:22: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6773E37B4EC; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 07:21:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from netcom1.netcom.com (user-2inited.dialup.mindspring.com [165.121.117.205]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA24403; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 10:21:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by netcom1.netcom.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 03F37E6A17; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 07:21:33 -0800 (PST) From: Mike Harding To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: kaltorak@quake.com.au, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: <200102080635.f186ZPe39170@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com> Subject: Re: Ports updating... Good ways? References: <3A8208E7.C6EE4C24@quake.com.au> <20010208061814.5E6C5E6A17@netcom1.netcom.com> <200102080635.f186ZPe39170@bmah-freebsd-0.cisco.com> Message-Id: <20010208152133.03F37E6A17@netcom1.netcom.com> Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 07:21:33 -0800 (PST) Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Well, just to defend myself... I find that pkg_version -c is a useful tool for helping me do upgrades. I do put the result in a file and do the appropriate thing. Sometimes I do make the wild leap of not rebuilding all of Gnome or something like that when a library has a .1 version upgrade. It does work fairly well for self contained ports. I do agree that something better is needed - one issue is the way that the ports system tracks dependencies. If the dependency was tracked in the dependent port rather than the other way around (in other words, the ports notes that it needs the library rather than the library noting that it is needed by another port) then the whole upgrade issue would be simpler as you could actually make multiple scans over the dependencies until everything was in order. Right now the dependency information is 'lost' if you ugrade a library. Also, say, upgrading X with the current system will cause huge amounts of things to be rebuilt - these ports depend on X but not the version. Ideally a combination of moving the dependency data and indicating major vs. minor upgrades for libraries and such would make for a rather nice system. By minor I mean an updgrade for a library that does internal bug fixes but doesn't change the external interface. - Mike H. Cc: kaltorak@quake.com.au, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Comments: In-reply-to Mike Harding message dated "Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:18:14 -0800." From: "Bruce A. Mah" Reply-To: bmah@FreeBSD.ORG X-Image-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Images/bmah-cisco-small.gif X-Url: http://www.employees.org/~bmah/ Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_-1931441307P"; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:35:25 -0800 Sender: bmah@cisco.com X-SpamBouncer: 1.3 (1/18/00) X-SBClass: OK --==_Exmh_-1931441307P Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii If memory serves me right, Mike Harding wrote: > pkg_version -c | sh > > often works but you will probably want to spool it to a file. No. Don't do this. The manual page even says so. The output from "pkg_version -c" needs editing before it can be used. For starters, it's generated in alphabetical order by port name, rather than in any order that has anything to do with the actual dependencies. Also, it's been known on at least one occasion to blow away ports upgrade kits in such a way as to render a system unusable. One more time: Don't blindly run the output of "pkg_version -c". Bruce. --==_Exmh_-1931441307P Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 iD8DBQE6gj4t2MoxcVugUsMRAkcbAKCVronRA3N3Q/Iw7EjfpteOcUHmHACg/SHa 0K4FGUXldvf1aKlHw1HGUWk= =ngN3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==_Exmh_-1931441307P-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message