From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 13 02:38:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6E116A403 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 02:38:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from duncan.fbsd@gmail.com) Received: from smtp111.sbc.mail.re2.yahoo.com (smtp111.sbc.mail.re2.yahoo.com [68.142.229.94]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B28D743D49 for ; Wed, 13 Sep 2006 02:38:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from duncan.fbsd@gmail.com) Received: (qmail 6949 invoked from network); 13 Sep 2006 02:38:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.20?) (donaldj@ameritech.net@75.7.74.134 with plain) by smtp111.sbc.mail.re2.yahoo.com with SMTP; 13 Sep 2006 02:38:12 -0000 Message-ID: <45076F0B.5090202@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:38:03 -0500 From: "Donald J. O'Neill" User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060912) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Perry Hutchison References: <8a0028260609120341v61920cf5p3aad4710ef3bd634@mail.gmail.com> <186816020.20060912160233@gmail.com> <200609122139.00187.list-freebsd-2004@morbius.sent.com> <10609122105.AA22770@pluto.rain.com> <4507352C.5030906@gmail.com> <10609130030.AA23373@pluto.rain.com> In-Reply-To: <10609130030.AA23373@pluto.rain.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The Ports collection / FreeBSD CDs X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 02:38:14 -0000 Perry Hutchison wrote: >>> ... at least in my recent experience, an up-to-date ports tree >>> does not always play nicely with a not-updated base install from >>> CD. >> That's very interesting. However, the ports tree on the CD isn't >> complete, as in: not all the ports are there. > > Any idea why? (I am referring to the ports tree itself, i.e. the > collection of skeleton directories. The set of distfiles provided > on CDs 3 and 4 is necessarily incomplete, both due to limited space > and because some distfiles have legal restrictions that prevent > their inclusion.) > >> I stopped installing the ports tree from the install CD a long >> time ago for that reason. > > Perhaps sysinstall's rather strong recommendation to install the > ports ought to be toned down a bit, e.g. to suggest installing > the ports from CD only if one does not have a high-speed Internet > connection. > You've asked a question, given some clarification as to what you are referring to, and I can tell you I don't have anything other than possibilities - which may be far from the truth - as to why this is. You're referring to a 4 CD set, that can't be downloaded from FreeBSD.org, that has to come from somewhere else, such as the FreeBSD Mall or somewhere else. I would use that if I couldn't connect to the Internet at all. Maybe, I should say: I can't tell you why it is that way. I've never been very concerned about it, just understood that it was that way and lived with it. I've never had a problem with an up-to-date ports tree not playing nicely with a RELEASE or a STABLE install. I suspect the reason is that I just never happened to up-date the ports tree at a time when there were problems. It does happen at times, but then... You've probably heard the advice "somethings wrong with your ports tree, blow it off and re-install it." It's not a big problem to deal with, the problem comes when you need to do it and don't. Sysinstall only asks if you want to install the ports tree. If I was going to update it with cvsup, I would install it from there. I use portsnap, so I don't install it from the CD. Yes, I have a hi-speed connection. It makes things easier. I wouldn't be without it. Don