From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sat Aug 22 13:50:30 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20AB63BBE1E for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:50:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wr1-x429.google.com (mail-wr1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::429]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BYfsd3x4yz4dvM for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:50:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-wr1-x429.google.com with SMTP id 88so4421543wrh.3 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2020 06:50:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mpjImtdw91c9uRfVhXujxbWnR4CZ/OvhnL89SYPJ01E=; b=Hv5eH4EulUCMy37gsVlNZYNrZs/BT817lAPwM+dXgPh3LrNdEOECMrY56mdN9Ivo6p P7NmOnz4dkx3UnzAvciv/+xxr360tzJ5nTic52HV+pFIB32VXVVjsWhdj/RE9hzHL94M d4ryRZq/UjFaqpF35mZYEyqWHrpJXz+sq7KxvYfDXttQ014gbpmdi/P7FzLltea97wv4 MecPb7eSwoiC3V1l0QjlxNHSgCShFqoyjWsro0fMG/FVlNq8MlSD+uFgMT5dS8NYaAHl LlkpKCCPsiMvoiUtPmrFLGPwXMybwZ83aNrvLzc84wOQsg/edRVTUOL81wD8BCKFIoey zCEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530lgJNTGqOzs0U9fKndxAFppk5L4Q6RI4AFPsZ2Ng5/jw70g0CI tLleoThelfqMWzySsD/FCVotJEPnHEQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJztBiGqEdYjV2RwZCt+/ejmyNGahsJ5XosqdJgw16aWdeB06236CDEOQRDIk1h9Dej5uxL+Xg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:68cf:: with SMTP id p15mr7335726wrw.148.1598104227590; Sat, 22 Aug 2020 06:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com ([2.217.224.242]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v16sm12293473wmj.14.2020.08.22.06.50.26 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 22 Aug 2020 06:50:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 14:50:23 +0100 From: RW To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: portsnap belated complaint? Message-ID: <20200822145023.68ef612f@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <1910cebb-026d-ee47-e793-23dc89ed4fe6@dreamchaser.org> References: <332bdd11-40f3-b5af-7683-aca6494abe6e@dreamchaser.org> <20200821193243.622b63e5@gumby.homeunix.com> <1910cebb-026d-ee47-e793-23dc89ed4fe6@dreamchaser.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.5 (GTK+ 2.24.32; amd64-portbld-freebsd12.1) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BYfsd3x4yz4dvM X-Spamd-Bar: / X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.18 / 15.00]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[googlemail.com:s=20161025]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[googlemail.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2a00:1450:4000::/36]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[googlemail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[googlemail.com,quarantine]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[2a00:1450:4864:20::429:from]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.18)[-0.184]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[2.217.224.242:received]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[googlemail.com]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2a00:1450::/32, country:US]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-questions]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[googlemail.com:dkim] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2020 13:50:30 -0000 On Fri, 21 Aug 2020 22:17:51 -0600 Gary Aitken wrote: > On 8/21/20 12:11 PM, Polytropon wrote: > >> ... > >> Fetching 4 metadata patches... done. > >> Applying metadata patches... done. > >> Fetching 0 metadata files... done. > >> Fetching 22 patches. > >> (22/22) 100.00% done. > >> done. > >> Applying patches... > >> done. > >> Fetching 2 new ports or files... done. > >> /usr/ports was not created by portsnap. > >> You must run 'portsnap extract' before running 'portsnap update'. > > How can it apply patches if an extract hasn't been done and is needed? > Does it knowingly, by default, apply patches to a tree it knows is > "bad"? In this case, bad may simply mean installed at sysinstall time? > Is that a known/documented behavior people rely on? The patches are being applied to the compressed snapshot, not to the ports tree. The main three commands are fetch - create or update the compressed snapshot from a remote server extract - extract the entire snapshot over the ports tree and initialize hidden metadata under the ports tree. update - compare metadata files and extract parts of the snapshot that have been updated It's not hugely wrong to adopt a tree installed from a tarball. The issue is that obsolete files that are outside of a port directory and weren't installed by portsnap wont be deleted automatically. Usually such files will be ignored, but there is a very small risk that they might have an effect. The original point of the tree from the installer is that it was the one used to created the packages on the installation media. This meant that it was safe to mix and match ports and packages provided you didn't update anything, other than applying security packages.