perl upgrade woes -- how to best reconcile?

[Chris H]

Greetings Mark, and thank you for your reply.
> Is there a reason you're avoiding poudriere/pkg ? It's simple to setup and
> extremely reliable. Your headaches go away because all of your package
> upgrades get built in a jail and you don't have a half-broken system while
> waiting for portmaster to run.
I was introduced to poudriere when I solicited recommendations from the list
prior to this upgrade -- portupgrade(1) | portmaster(8) -- which is more effective for large
upgrade?
After examining this port, it was clear that my whole upgrade scheme would
have to completely change. While it would be nice to build everything, and
then "push" the builds onto the target box. This is not an immediate option.
Tho it is my intention to create a box to produce packages targeted for all
of my servers. While I realize that poudriere doesn't require a separate box
to do this work, I wasn't willing to take on yet another change, just to
perform this upgrade. As it was; I was going from 8.3-STABLE --> 8.4 &&
(cv)sup --> subversion 1.7 --> subversion 1.8 -- and this was just to get to
8.4. I made the solicitation to the list, because my normal choice was using
portupgrade(1). But given that it wasn't all that uncommon to run into database
issues, and sometimes even upgrading portupgrade itself; given the extra
dependencies. I ultimately decided on portmaster(8) because it required nothing
that the system didn't already provide. I also don't believe that when facing
issues, that adding additional variables makes the process any more stable --
especially given that I'm already not dealing with a completely stable system.
Anyway, you asked. So now you know. :)

Thanks again, for taking the time to respond.

--chris


> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>