From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 22 15:34:47 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBCE11065677 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:34:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bri@brianwhalen.net) Received: from entwistle.sonicboom.org (entwistle.sonicboom.org [66.93.34.170]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AA088FC12 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:34:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bri@brianwhalen.net) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (dsl093-034-235.snd1.dsl.speakeasy.net [66.93.34.235]) by entwistle.sonicboom.org (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m3MF21w8031956 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:02:04 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bri@brianwhalen.net) Message-ID: <480DFDEE.5020303@brianwhalen.net> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:02:06 -0700 From: Brian User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org References: <20080420211717.be366660.skeptikos@gmail.com> <480C1E3F.2020300@highperformance.net> In-Reply-To: <480C1E3F.2020300@highperformance.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: port management practices X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 15:34:47 -0000 Jason C. Wells wrote: > I don't. > > It's too much work. I don't update ports for the duration of a major > release's life. What ever ports came out for 6.3 (that's when I quit > trying to manage ports) are typically what I am running. When 7.1 is > released (I don't run x.0 releases) I will reinstall ports based on a > homegrown script and a couple text files. > > My response is brief but I'll tell you I have tried everything. There > was much suffering that went into my ports management method. I'm much > happier now. I spend more time using my computers and less time > maintaining them. > > The problem is non-trivial. I am curious how -ports folks maintain > their sanity. That's a phenomena worth studying. > > Regards, > Jason > > I suppose this is relative to the number of ports installed, but it really isnt that difficult under normal circumstances. If you have one that needs to be treated differently, then ask why does it indeed to be treated differently and is it worth it. Over the last few years, I have had very few problems where portsnap followed by portupgrade didn't work. The dependency problems are the toughest, the last one of those I had I fixed with portmanager. For me, a goal worth pursuing is to make it easier, so you don't need to be a longterm user to figure out how to easily update system and/or ports, it should be a little easier AND apparent; even Microsoft and Redhat tell you when there are updates to be applied. Brian