From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 12 09:24:36 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B3E81065675 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:24:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-doc@fjl.co.uk) Received: from bs1.fjl.org.uk (bs1.fjl.org.uk [84.45.41.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7D5E8FC12 for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:24:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.35] (mux.fjl.org.uk [62.3.120.246]) (authenticated bits=0) by bs1.fjl.org.uk (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q3C9O1hn049579 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-DSS-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:24:02 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from freebsd-doc@fjl.co.uk) Message-ID: <4F869F33.1010501@fjl.co.uk> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 10:24:03 +0100 From: Frank Leonhardt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120312 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org References: <20120412090309.GK26895@goofy01.vnodelab.local> In-Reply-To: <20120412090309.GK26895@goofy01.vnodelab.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: "Doing the deed" on portupgrade X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 09:24:36 -0000 On 12/04/2012 10:03, Joel Dahl wrote: > On 12-04-2012 8:26, Chris Rees wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Even since its deprecation, portupgrade has proven to be very popular >> with newcomers, which I might be inclined to blame on the fact that >> the Handbook lists it first. >> >> Two patches: >> >> >> Rendered at http://www.bayofrum.net/~crees/rendered/portupgrade.html >> >> Thoughts? Anyone want to risk approving it? > Good idea. I'd like to see Portmaster first in the list though, and not > Portmanager. > The text on the rendered version opens with "Portmanager is *another* utility for easy upgrading when it's now the first to be mentioned. Not knowing very much about this system, I've always been a little confused by the multifarious options in the documentation like this. Listing them in order of preference would help but it'd be nice to start a section like this with the pros and cons of the various strategies about to be outlined . The reason for not using portupgrade is clear; Portmaster looks a good option because it implies it won't drag in every scripting language and module under the sun when you build it (according to the documentation posted). So why would anyone use Portmanager? (Incidentally, I have always used portupgrade, simply because it's first on the list). Regards, Frank.