From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 15 16:09:27 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 923D7173
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:09:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 440DE137B
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:09:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s0FG9DB6081568;
 Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:09:13 -0700 (MST)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost)
 by wonkity.com (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) with ESMTP id s0FG9DfR081565;
 Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:09:13 -0700 (MST)
 (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com)
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:09:13 -0700 (MST)
From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com>
To: Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>
Subject: Re: Combining pkg and "traditional ports"
In-Reply-To: <20140115071739.202648fd.freebsd@edvax.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1401150908460.81528@wonkity.com>
References: <20140115063634.d6d26d51.freebsd@edvax.de>
 <20140115135812.7863d575@X220.alogt.com>
 <20140115071739.202648fd.freebsd@edvax.de>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3
 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Wed, 15 Jan 2014 09:09:13 -0700 (MST)
Cc: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com>,
 FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:09:27 -0000

On Wed, 15 Jan 2014, Polytropon wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:58:12 +0800, Erich Dollansky wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 06:36:34 +0100
>> Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote:
>>
>>> With the upcoming OS standardization on pkg (pkgng) following
>>> the abolishment of the pkg_* toolset I'd like to ask questions
>>
>> did I get something wrong or does this only affects the binary
>> 'distribution'?
>>
>> As long as the ports are in place, png should have no impact on them.
>
> No, you're right - ports and packages can still coexist with the
> new tool. Programs like portupgrade and portmaster should also be
> able to adapt to pkg (registering installed software and so on).
>
>
>
>> But if you upgrade your system using packages, you will overwrite
>> whatever is on the system and might destroy parts of it as the binary
>> installed uses the wrong options.
>
> That's what I've been fearing. Instead of specifying "nearly all"
> packages manually, my idea would have been to "upgrade all with
> the exceptions of".

See pkg-lock(8) for this.