From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 2 09:24:33 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9090106566C for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 09:24:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from olli@lurza.secnetix.de) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (lurza.secnetix.de [IPv6:2a01:170:102f::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 555858FC0A for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 09:24:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lurza.secnetix.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p829OGZm000944; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:32 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from oliver.fromme@secnetix.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by lurza.secnetix.de (8.14.3/8.14.3/Submit) id p829OGAG000943; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:16 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 11:24:16 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <201109020924.p829OGAG000943@lurza.secnetix.de> From: Oliver Fromme To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20110902010937.12d07e77@gumby.homeunix.com> X-Newsgroups: list.freebsd-ports User-Agent: tin/1.9.6-20101126 ("Burnside") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/6.4-PRERELEASE-20080904 (i386)) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.5 (lurza.secnetix.de [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 02 Sep 2011 11:24:32 +0200 (CEST) Cc: Subject: Re: Ports system quality X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 09:24:34 -0000 (Not replying to any particular post in this thread.) I think the current ports system in FreeBSD is not bad. Sure, it could be better (but this would probably require more manpower, which is a problem in a volunteer project), but it also could be a *lot* worse. I know of several people who are typical "release users". They install a FreeBSD release from CD/DVD and use the ports or packages that came with that release. Usually that works very well because of the testing during the ports freeze that happens in preparation for every release. They never update (or maybe only when there are serious security issues) and happily keep using those very ports until they update to a newer release, one or two (or more) years later. The other extreme are people who run a cron job every night that updates /usr/ports (*) and runs "400.status-pkg" (from /etc/periodic/weekly), possibly even followed by an automated update (**). Of course this will sometimes break. That's normal and to be expected, because the ports collection is changed and modified constantly by many people, except during freeze. There is always something that's broken. If you're affected, you need to postpone the update of the respective ports until someone (possibly including yourself) unbreaks it. That's the price to pay when you want to be on the "bleeding edge" instead of waiting for the next freeze and updating the ports to the release tag only. Personally, on my workstation at home I make a complete update every few months (2 to 4 times a year). If there are any security vulnerabilities reported by portaudit, I update the affected ports immediately, of course. (By the way, I use neither portupgrade nor portmaster, but a self-made script. However, portmaster really isn't that bad and should work fine for most users. :-) Finally, I recommend to install ports-mgmt/pkg_cutleaves and run it regularly after updates. It helps removing ports that you don't need. Rule of thumb: The less ports you have, the less dependencies exist, so updates will be less complex, and you're less likely to be affected by breakage. With that in mind, I keep the ports count on my workstation on a moderate level: $ pkg_info | wc -l 559 Best regards Oliver (*) For example: http://www.secnetix.de/olli/scripts/ports-check-update (**) http://www.secnetix.de/olli/scripts/ports-update-list -- Oliver Fromme, secnetix GmbH & Co. KG, Marktplatz 29, 85567 Grafing b. M. Handelsregister: Registergericht Muenchen, HRA 74606, Geschäftsfuehrung: secnetix Verwaltungsgesellsch. mbH, Handelsregister: Registergericht Mün- chen, HRB 125758, Geschäftsführer: Maik Bachmann, Olaf Erb, Ralf Gebhart FreeBSD-Dienstleistungen, -Produkte und mehr: http://www.secnetix.de/bsd "If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor, and when was the last time you needed one?" -- Tom Cargil, C++ Journal