Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 11:47:24 -0600 From: Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Upgrading php with pkg Message-ID: <1424713644.2437211.231310185.721AACDF@webmail.messagingengine.com> In-Reply-To: <CAF-QHFULCv1fk6egUkHLJTuNSR7otBTSYq6ySV6YKk6QmZOjMQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAF-QHFULCv1fk6egUkHLJTuNSR7otBTSYq6ySV6YKk6QmZOjMQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015, at 10:48, Ivan Voras wrote: > Hi, > > It's time for my yearly rant about pkg seemingly not being able to > upgrade > whole sets of dependencies while installing or upgrading packages. > > In short, if we have this: > > package A depends on package B, which depends on package C > > ...upgrading package B *must always* result in an upgrade to package A, > and > *must* cause an upgrade of package C *iff* the new version of package B > is > linked with a different version of package C (e.g. if it depends on a > newer > version of package C). > > Using heuristics such as checking versions encoded in .so filenames are > rarely enough because (upstream) developers are lazy. I can give examples > from the PHP-Apache-PostgreSQL stack at request. > > If this is not done, we have the situation described here: > http://ivoras.net/blog/tree/2015/Feb-why-freebsds-pkg-sucks.html > > The post is somewhat strongly worded, and I believe it will be even more > strongly worded a year from now ;) > While I do agree that # pkg install php53-fileinfo should list more packages that need to be upgraded, you're walking on thin ice by installing new packages related to existing ones without upgrading all of your packages first. The following is absolutely unsupported last I checked: # pkg upgrade php53 Upgrade all of your packages or none. The stability of the packages are very much reliant on all packages being from the exact same package set / SVN revision. Mixing packages when packages/ports is a rolling release has always been a dangerous game to play. If you require a stable set of package like that you should be using the quarterly package sets. In that situation you wouldn't have received php53-fileinfo-5.3.29; it would have been the exact same as the existing packages from that quarterly set.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1424713644.2437211.231310185.721AACDF>