FreeBSD did it again (still)
Baho Utot
baho-utot at columbus.rr.com
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