Upgrading a Port on 8.2

Guido Falsi mad at madpilot.net
Tue Feb 18 19:31:12 UTC 2014


On 02/18/14 18:26, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 5:36 AM, Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net
> <mailto:mad at madpilot.net>> wrote:
> 
>     On 02/18/14 08:54, Erich Dollansky wrote:
>     > On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:51:51 -0800
>     > Hi,
>     >
>     > Doug Hardie <bc979 at lafn.org <mailto:bc979 at lafn.org>> wrote:
>     >
>     >>
>     >> On 17 February 2014, at 21:43, Erich Dollansky
>     >> <erichsfreebsdlist at alogt.com
>     <mailto:erichsfreebsdlist at alogt.com>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2014 21:07:43 -0800
>     >>> Doug Hardie <bc979 at lafn.org <mailto:bc979 at lafn.org>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>>> I have an older, but basically clean, install of 8.2 on a
>     >>>> production system.  It has a few ports that were installed back
>     >>>> when 8.2 was new.  However, I need to add pdftk.  Pkg_add did that
>     >>>> nicely. HOwever, it added version 1.44.  The history for pdftk
>     >>>> shows that a major problem was fixed in 1.45 and I am encountering
>     >>>> that problem and need to upgrade.  Portupgrade pdftk does
>     >>>> nothing.  It seems to decide that the latest version is 1.44.
>     >>>> However, on a 9.2 system, I get a much higher version number.  Is
>     >>>> there any way to determine if 1.44 is the latest version that will
>     >>>> run with 8.2 or is there another way I need to upgrade to ports
>     >>>> files?  Its my understanding that cvsup is no longer with us.
>     >>>
>     >>> how I understand your problem, the behaviour of the machine is
>     >>> normal as you kept the old ports tree.
>     >>>
>     >>> If you would like to have a newer version of a port, you would have
>     >>> to update the ports tree first. The big but is then that you will
>     >>> have to update all installed ports too and then install the program
>     >>> you need.
>     >>>
>     >>> If you have real bad luck, this could force you even to upgrade from
>     >>> 8.2 to 8.4. So, be careful.
>     >>
>     >> Thats what I expected, but the question remains:  how?  Cvsup I
>     >> believe is no longer with us and purtupgrade apparently doesn't do
>     >> that either.
>     >
>     > I would suggest that you take ftp to download the current ports tree.
>     > It contains then a current svn. You would not need svn after this as
>     > the ports are downloaded by using fetch.
>     >
>     > Of course, for further updates, I would recommend moving to svn.
> 
>     This is more a personal opinion, but for general production use(not
>     development) portsnap is a much better choice than subversion. portsnap
>     is usually not more than one hour behind the subversion repository, so,
>     if you don't really need the latest changes, it's quite fresh and much
>     faster at downloading updates. It's also included in base also on older
>     releases (10 and up have svnlite included in base too).
> 
>     just an opinion though.
> 
> 
> In general, I agree wholeheartedly.
> 
> There is one potential issue with using portsnap that will only be
> significant to a very few, but might unpleasantly surprise someone.
> 
> Unlike svn, portsnap will overwrite the ports tree and eliminate any
> local modifications. Most people don't have any of these, so for most,
> this is not an issue. People just need to be aware of it if they do as
> the files are gone after running portsnap, making recovery a pain.

I agree, but for people who really need to keep local modofications to
the ports tree I'd suggest using ports-mgmt/portshaker in conjunction
with their VCS of choice(or plain directories...)

-- 
Guido Falsi <mad at madpilot.net>


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list