Free BSD 8.1
smithi at nimnet.asn.au
Tue Sep 28 14:43:09 UTC 2010
In freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 330, Issue 2, Message: 22
On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 00:02:29 -0700 perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> Mike Clarke <jmc-freebsd2 at milibyte.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Monday 27 September 2010, perryh at pluto.rain.com wrote:
> > > I've recently started on a new system, and am planning to
> > > install 8.1-RELEASE, including the corresponding ports tree;
> > > then install what ports I can from packages and also fetch the
> > > corresponding distfiles; and finally build -- from release-
> > > corresponding ports -- any that aren't available as packages or
> > > where I want non-default OPTION settings. That approach should
> > > avoid most nasty surprises while getting things set up and
> > > working. _After_ everything is installed and configured
> > > properly will be plenty soon enough to consider whether any
> > > ports need to be updated -- and the already-installed-and-
> > > working package collection will provide a fallback in case
> > > of trouble trying to build any updated versions.
> > The problem is if/when you need to update a port as a result of
> > a security advisory. If your ports tree is very much out of date
> > then it's likely that updating that one port will require a number
> > of dependencies to be updated as well, sometimes all the ports
> > depending on one or more of the updated dependencies need to be
> > updated as well and the resultant bag of worms can take quite a
> > lot of sorting out. The "little and often" approach of keeping
> > the ports tree up to date could be less traumatic.
> and, in this context, your point is?
> I'm advocating starting from a stable and self-consistent baseline,
> consisting of a release _and_ its corresponding port/package
> collection, and then considering whether any updates are needed.
> Isn't that orthogonal to the question of whether or not to follow
> ports updates, once the baseline has been established?
Makes sense to me. There's been a ports freeze and extra attention to
consistency of dependencies leading up to a -RELEASE, so there's a much
better chance of all your ports working together from the outset, then
you can update them at leisure while still getting on with some work!
That there's also a self-consistent complete set of packages at that
point seems lost on some folks having good enough bandwidth and fast
enough systems to never need bothering with packages.
I agree with Mike about the worms :) I have an 8.0-RELEASE system with
many ports installed and quite a few configured to taste with a recently
upgraded 8-STABLE world, working through a huge portversion update list,
started by fetching over 900MB of packages so far including X and KDE by
portupgrade -aFPP. It's going to take a while, and I'll be surprised if
I don't skin a few knuckles on circular dependencies along the way.
More information about the freebsd-questions