Date: Wed, 3 May 2006 15:21:34 -0400 From: "Bakki Kudva" <bakki.kudva@gmail.com> To: "Daniel Bye" <freebsd-questions@slightlystrange.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: nubie question - Ports - Ruby 1.8.4 Message-ID: <f7f43c920605031221v27740069v6d999772e9214c33@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20060502222456.GA81178@catflap.slightlystrange.org> References: <f7f43c920605021003l45c85281t49ca7cb68fe1e@mail.gmail.com> <20060502172801.GB61778@catflap.slightlystrange.org> <f7f43c920605021337i6c03e68dg1287a29af3c5fd1d@mail.gmail.com> <20060502210618.GA26953@catflap.slightlystrange.org> <f7f43c920605021452p729adfb3h7243f399252cee24@mail.gmail.com> <20060502222456.GA81178@catflap.slightlystrange.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel, Thank you very much for your help. I am golden now. Everything is working and I am really impressed with FreeBSD (I came from Linux world, particularly Debian). I got sound, USB etc working now and the process was quite enjoyable. Your explanation about ports versioning really belongs in the handbook. If you know the doc maintainers it would be great if this info can be added to the handbook. -bakki On 5/2/06, Daniel Bye <freebsd-questions@slightlystrange.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 05:52:14PM -0400, Bakki Kudva wrote: > > FIXED! I have Ruby 1.8.4 in my tree now. > > > > I had not done... > > # portsnap extract > > > > I was a bit mislead because when I did > > # portsnap fetch > > after downloading it said it was 'extracting'. So I skipped extract. My= bad. > > > > I still would like to ask you gurus a couple of questions if I may. > > > > 1. During sysinstall it had asked me if I wanted the ports collection > > installed which had 13,000 apps, would take 400MB of space yada yada > > yada...I assumed by saying yes and since I was installing off the boot > > only CD I would get the LATEST ports from the main site. Why didn't I? > > In chapter 4.5 of the handbook portsnap is given as an alternative to > > sysinstall. So what is the difference between ports installed via > > sysinstall vs. that from portsnap? > > The ports tree installed by the CD was made at the same time the release > was cut. So, due to the enormous amount of work done by all the many > porters, it is pretty much obsolete within minutes. The reason? > Logistics, pure and simple. It would be impracticable to try and keep > the ports tree up to date for the ISOs. I think this applies to the > boot-only ISO as well - the installer knows which release it is > installing, so it automatically goes and finds the version of the ports > tree that was released at the same time. > > If you have a reasonable connection to the Internet, use portsnap or > cvsup to keep your ports tree up to date, as the handbook says. > > Portsnap maintains some metadata so it can easily track which snapshot > you last applied, and can find the appropriate updates to bring you up > to date. By contrast, as explained above, sysinstall will install the > ports tree as it was at the time your release was cut. (I believe it is > possible to tell it to install a different release's ports tree, but why > you'd want to isn't quite clear.) > > Others will assuredly know more of this than I, and if I have anything > wrong they will doubtless correct me! (Well, I hope so, any way ;-) > > > 2. Unrelated: I did a pkg_version and see that there are a whole bunch > > of packages (may be 80-90%) which need updating. I am just trying > > FreeBSD for now on my laptop which is an old Gateway with Pentium II > > 400 MHz. It took nearly 2-3 days (it would pause with some dialog > > which needed human input so I am not sure how long it might have taken > > with me sitting in front of it all the time) to install gnome2 from > > the ports. I don't know how long it might take to do a complete system > > upgrade. So the question I have is on current technology (say Athlon64 > > or Coreduo with 1GB of RAM) how long does it take to install a > > complete system + upgrade it to the ports tree for a X-developer > > workstation? Sorry about the loaded question. > > I have an Acer Aspire 1360 laptop (AMD Sempron 3000+ (actually rated at > 1801.04 MHz, according to dmesg(1)), 512MB RAM), and > it takes around 9 or 10 hours to build OpenOffice 2.0. I don't use > Gnome or KDE, so don't have any experience of build times on this > particular machine. A buildworld takes around an hour and a half to two > hours (I don't tend to take measurements, I'm afraid, so am probably not > the best person to answer this bit of your question!) I remember from a > previous job, using some AMD64 machines with 2GB RAM, a buildworld was > complete in something like 45 minutes. That was 5.2-RELEASE. > > On the other hand, I have an UltraSPARC machine that takes about 9 hours > to buildworld... > > Dan > > -- > Daniel Bye > > PGP Key: ftp://ftp.slightlystrange.org/pgpkey/dan.asc > PGP Key fingerprint: D349 B109 0EB8 2554 4D75 B79A 8B17 F97C 1622 166A > _ > ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) > - against HTML, vCards and X > - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f7f43c920605031221v27740069v6d999772e9214c33>