From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jun 27 02:37:21 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32431BAE
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:37:21 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from lambert@lambertfam.org)
Received: from www.jail.lambertfam.org (atom1.lambertfam.org [69.153.112.46])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 164391E57
 for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:37:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by www.jail.lambertfam.org (Postfix, from userid 999)
 id 562953B29B; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:37:17 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 21:37:17 -0500
From: Scott Lambert <lambert@lambertfam.org>
To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: portupgrade(1) | portmaster(8) -- which is more effective for
 large upgrade?
Message-ID: <20130627023717.GE3842@www.jail.lambertfam.org>
Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
References: <67588ada736599c95cac241b3c3af730.authenticated@ultimatedns.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <67588ada736599c95cac241b3c3af730.authenticated@ultimatedns.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
 <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 02:37:21 -0000

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 05:34:45PM -0700, Chris H wrote:
> Greetings, and thank you for your reply.
>
> I understand that portupgrade _will_ pull in other dependencies _as
> needed_ -- I _do_ read the man(1) pages. :)
>
> But it installed (pulled in) far more than those dependencies
> actually required.  I believe, due to the fact that it doesn't
> appear to honor the original build options recorded in
> /var/db/ports/<portname>/options. Nor, do I recall that it honored
> /etc/make.conf -- make.conf(5). Maybe things have changed?

You may have asked portupgrade to use packages first and fall back
to building from source.  That would install the packages which were
built with the default options on the package building cluster.  It
saves time; but I don't like mixing packages with build from source,
especially when I want custom options on anything.

-- 
Scott Lambert                    KC5MLE                       Unix SysAdmin
lambert@lambertfam.org