From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 18:56:27 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9DBF16A4CE for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:56:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.owt.com (smtp.owt.com [204.118.6.19]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74D5243D39 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:56:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kstewart@owt.com) Received: from localhost.invalid (owt-207-41-94-233.owt.com [207.41.94.233]) by smtp.owt.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i292u6fH007754; Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:56:06 -0800 From: Kent Stewart To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:56:23 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.6 References: <20040308143529.K11003@server.gisp.dk> <20040308215112.GB8758@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20040308215112.GB8758@xor.obsecurity.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200403081856.23236.kstewart@owt.com> cc: Michael Sig Birkmose cc: Kris Kennaway Subject: Re: portupgrade and binary packages X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 02:56:27 -0000 On Monday 08 March 2004 01:51 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 02:39:18PM +0100, Michael Sig Birkmose wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > I recently tried to switch from compiling everything myself from > > ports, to use portupgrade -PP package_name. > > > > However, after having run CVSUP on my ports tree, I run into the > > problem, that the binary packages from ftp.something.freebsd.org > > are far behind the version in the portstree. > > > > After a little bit of digging, I found out that > > ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-5-current/ > > has much newer binary packages. > > > > However it stills is a bit behind? > > What is the solution to this problem, or is there none? I would > > really like to avoid compiling things... > > Since computers and mirror site bandwidth are still not infinitely > fast, there will always be a time lag between the packages on the ftp > site and the ports in the ports collection [1]. Unfortunately this > means that you can't have it both ways: either you can compile the > latest versions of all the ports yourself, or you can install > packages that are a bit older. > The other side is that ports follows -current and -stable. It hasn't been that long since make on something like 4.8-release wouldn't build some ports. Would such a package install on the older systems? People have had ways of building just make but that won't always work. Bison was also an example but I don't show any installed ports on my system that depend on bison-1.75_2. Of course, my pkg_info -R "$1" lookup command fails frequently. Kent Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html