From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 2 16:58:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BEC616A420 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 16:58:27 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Received: from mail.scls.lib.wi.us (mail.scls.lib.wi.us [198.150.40.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22AC243D48 for ; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 16:58:24 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Received: from [172.26.2.238] ([172.26.2.238]) by mail.scls.lib.wi.us (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id k22GwNhG031907; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:58:23 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from nalists@scls.lib.wi.us) Message-ID: <4407242F.4060207@scls.lib.wi.us> Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:58:23 -0600 From: Greg Barniskis User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vivek Khera References: <6E3F0C8A-99C7-42F2-9A71-DBD6051DEEFF@khera.org> In-Reply-To: <6E3F0C8A-99C7-42F2-9A71-DBD6051DEEFF@khera.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-stable , petefrench@ticketswitch.com Subject: Re: New ports on older stable (4.11) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 16:58:27 -0000 Vivek Khera wrote: > > On Mar 1, 2006, at 6:05 AM, Pete French wrote: > >> I dont know how backward compatible ports are ggenerally, but I >> have a 4.11 machine that I really want to upgrade the ports on. >> But I dont know if they will alla ctually compile, and I dont wnat to >> start doing the process only to find that I cant build one of them >> possibly. Does anybody know if this is likely to work, or is it >> simply unsupported ? > > i have several 4.11 machines in service with ports mostly up-to-date. > what you can do is cd to the port and run "make". If it builds chances > are it will work, then you can do the necessary port upgrades. I've done a similar thing on a creaky old P-III lab router/firewall that didn't really need replacing before death, was too slow to bother with religiously updating, yet still needed some degree of ports currency for specific lab scenarios. Using portversion to preview what needs making and portupgrade -aF to prefetch the sources (after doing cvsup ports and make fetchindex) can help streamline your trial and error process. The OP had spake thusly in a prior msg: > Never used portupgrade and am not really in the mood for investigating > exciting new software at the same time as the upgrade. With sysadmin mood having a lot of influence re: success rates, do what you like, of course. But portupgrade and friends (and competitors) can save you a lot of time and grief. On the other hand, I'm not sure it'd be very happy when you first fire it up on an old box where a lot of manual ports management has already occurred, and cleaning up a messed package database is probably the least fun aspect of portupgrade. The best time to learn it might be the next time you do a clean install of say, 6.1. -- Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator South Central Library System (SCLS) Library Interchange Network (LINK) , (608) 266-6348