FreeBSD did it again (still)

Baho Utot baho-utot at
Thu Jul 6 11:23:49 UTC 2017

On 07/06/17 02:07, Heikki Lindholm wrote:
> On 06.07.2017 00:39, Baho Utot wrote:
>> On 7/5/2017 5:30 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>> On 2017-07-06 03:21, Baho Utot wrote:
>>>> On 7/5/2017 4:31 PM, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
>>>>> On 2017-07-06 01:54, Baho Utot wrote:
>>>>>> Up graded an old laptop from 10.1 to 11.0-p10.  I then checked out 
>>>>>> the latest quarterly ports.  I figured that FreeBSD would barf and 
>>>>>> I was not disappointed. Built the ports with synth and then I 
>>>>>> installed them, xorg promptly shit itself.
>>>>>> So I typed pkg autoremove just for shits and giggles. Before the 
>>>>>> upgrade pkg autoremove did nothing ( nothing to remove ) the 
>>>>>> latest pkg wanted to remove all of Xorg and some other things but 
>>>>>> not remove lumina.  Figure that one out.
>>>>>> Working on figuring this out.
>>>>>> Can you tell me why FreeBSD doesn't need versioned ports again? I 
>>>>>> am just looking for something that works, I don't need the last 
>>>>>> version of xyz that just came off the press.
>>>>>> Thinking I may need to leave FreeBSD and find something that is 
>>>>>> stable/works.  An upgrade from a recent version should not requir 
>>>>>> days to weeks to get it to work.
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> Not sure what you are aiming at here but - just felt I had to comment.
>>>>> You are probably right that there must be cohersion between 
>>>>> packages and system when using prebuilt binaries.
>>>>> My way of doing it is the opposite, everything is compiled from 
>>>>> source, the classic *nix way. This way, FreeBSD has never let me down.
>>>>> I think the best approach if you have an older system where it 
>>>>> takes ages to compile, you really need to follow a strict path 
>>>>> using packages. On a more recent system, nothing beats source builds.
>>>>> There has been a lot of discussion over this matter recently, 
>>>>> please understand that this is not RedHat or Ubuntu, the resources 
>>>>> needed to keep up with building binaries are limited in comparison. 
>>>>> If you need prebuilt packages, please just contribute to the work.
>>>>> Just my SEK 0.2
>>>>> //per
>>>> I built the ports from svn source using synth I did not use prebuilt 
>>>> binaries.  I did do it the classic *nix way.
>>> That was odd. But if you provide more detailed info I'm sure there is 
>>> help on the list.
>>> I only use portmaster due to its ease of use, have no experience from 
>>> synth.
>>> //per
>> What is ODD is that I have not received my original post that started 
>> this thread, from the mailing list.  It has not come thru the FreeBSD 
>> mailing list.   I wanted to have a look at the headers. I checked the 
>> timestamps on my client box was/is correct ( running ntp ) my mail 
>> server is correct ( running ntp ).
>> I am investigating why  the upgrade to the laptop has failed.   This 
>> happens every time I upgrade if the upgrade cycle is 6 months to a 
>> year.  I simply don't have the time to go thru this every time I do an 
>> upgrade.  It should just work ( I know some edge case may not that is 
>> not what I am talking about ).  One should be able to update a machine 
>> ( desktop ) and it should still function.  If I am crashing a package 
>> or two that is fine, the whole desktop should not go from usable to 
>> crashing/puking/barfing.
> I think problems are to expected from a rolling style of distro. I've 
> been using FreeBSD as my main desktop for half a year now and every 
> ports upgrade has required some tweaking. I've submitted patches and 
> they have usually been applied quickly and stuff has got fixed. On the 
> flip side you get the ability to configure the ports (which I've found 
> so great in FreeBSD ports that it's hard to go back to anything else) 
> and not having to do major re-installs of the whole system every half a 
> year to stay current (ubuntu).

Should you not be confindent in that the base system builds followed by 
Xorg and a desktop manager?

> Compared to, say, gentoo, FreeBSD ports has still been much less 
> trouble. On gentoo, in addition to generic ports breakage, you're also 
> fighting the ports/package manager that constantly wants you to accept 
> packages, one by one, from testing/unstable side or add accepted 
> architectures to packages, just make stuff buidld/install at all.
> One thing I'd like to see in a ports system (if not already there) is 
> some kind of install journal and tools using it that would allow, for 
> instance, to do a whole reinstall from scratch as in "do what I did to 
> build this system, but use the new versions" and it would install ports 
> with the same options in exactly the same order (if allowed by new 
> dependencies), or allow removing cruft introduced by some package that 
> I've deleted that no other packages are using (pkg autoremove is too 
> broad).

I am doing what you are asking for by using some shell scripts and 
synth.  The problems comes from after getting it to work when you bring 
the script and synth out 6 months later it will not build a system that 
runs,  only crashes and then you get to fix it.. Well I just don't have 
time for that type of cycle any more.  If synth plus some scripts worked 
8 times out of 10 I would be good with that but it fails every time.  I 
can not then build reproducable systems.  The two problems I have is 
that if I don't save the svn repos for base and ports somewhere I have 
nothng to start from to build a system.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list