From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 7 00:17:01 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B235F106566B for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2010 00:17:01 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bf1783@googlemail.com) Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com (ey-out-2122.google.com [74.125.78.24]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4EA848FC0A for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2010 00:17:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ey-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 25so408079eya.3 for ; Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:17:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=iplTVsGhVjgHjmakz+4R0bB5RoW4xoHa+atDLrr40XQ=; b=qhJcSN34XGWmt0J7mXOTQEdRUfspzeoUB9cNZCDlwWHgvXeIQjOKtkePf1ouGptA7b mATXmwm5+3/CrgR8bMLv/Fuq/nA4jIquc6e/rxWVAQEoBd7TclzME6xC2WM4hPpXE+Hn QEZzwyKY6UXbiXTfOtOPO23ESZXbOQpipTlCo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=ZHZBsGaRHdVA7Vno8T8sF+d4T+Fl4zrpmY/4JCoUNSyjscfANta6UhKRN2lL5WMtCC dvGhYzLRDjMfKlw5+jxJpNNUrPznShUwRrrvdsm4h/WFvPNCN4orJRPBCgMeRhPszP0l kN0B9ecRgrlk+YyCpkMsfVnZuvbTSmBv5VtlE= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.86.85 with SMTP id v63mr373160wee.32.1265501820097; Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:17:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2010 19:17:00 -0500 Message-ID: From: "b. f." To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: ajtiM Subject: Re: why update... 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: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:17:01 -0000 >...if is doesn't work??? > >It is not the first time and I think the last too but I have a question >anywhere: > >The problem is jpeg 8.0 which need to update many ports. It is not a problem >if works. But if doesn't which is my case that is a problem. As I sent a >previous mails about problem to rebuilt qt33 and arts (not just me) and the >problem became a BIG problem because many other applications don't work. Why >all of this rush for update a port in this case jpeg which IMO is not so >important (BTW Linux world use K3b for KDE 4 more than six months without >problem, we don't) and update for QT33 doen't works??? Is it QT33 less >important as jpeg 8.0. As a user of FreeBSD I expected that when update is in >the port that is safe to use this port. But looks like that I am wrong. >Thanks. "Why update?" is a question that *you* should ask *before* you update your ports tree, or rebuild your ports. No one is forcing you to track the latest ports tree, that is *your* choice. Committers put in a lot of work to try to ensure that large updates go as smoothly as possible, but there are often some problems that go undetected during test builds, and need to be fixed after the first commit. If you don't feel confident about resolving such problems yourself, then wait for several days after a major commit for the dust to settle before updating. There are four major kinds of problems that often go undetected by test builds: 1) problems that occur because of the presence of outdated or conflicting ports (in the test builds, everything is built in a clean sandbox, unlike on most actual systems, where the presence of ports that haven't yet been updated or conflict but don't have the proper CONFLICTS entries can break updates); 2) problems due to ports built with non-default build options (there are just too many build options in ports to test every possible combination of options, so most test builds just use the defaults; users who use non-default options may have to work with committers to fix any resulting problems); 3) problems that arise because portmaster, portupgrade, and other build tools don't do what the test servers do (sometimes these third-party tools are broken, or problems arise because the tools leave outdated ports in place as they are rebuilding them, so that users can continue to use the ports during the time that they are rebuilt; this can lead to problems that can usually be circumvented, but may break big batches of port builds); and 4) run-time problems that occur after the updating of a port (there are far too many ports, and too few of them have regression test suites with complete coverage that are run before installation, to test the entire functionality of every port as part of a pre-commit test, so users can expect some problems to slip through). You can cut down on the number of problems that you encounter from 1) and 3) by removing all of the ports that you intend to update, and all of the ports that depend upon them, before updating them. There was no "rush", as you put it, involved with this update: the committer announced his intention to do this on the mailing lists on Jan. 24, then he worked with other committers to do a full test run, before making any changes. Again, you have the option of using a previous version of the ports tree, or of using packages, or of managing your updates more carefully, or of not using ports at all, but some other packaging system. You should expect problems from all of these: nothing is perfect.