Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 21 Mar 2009 01:44:13 +0000
From:      RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: portupdate xorg-server
Message-ID:  <20090321014413.42ce80b2@gumby.homeunix.com>
In-Reply-To: <ab7b49bc0903201504x126b3daas5944cb096829c0e@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <ab7b49bc0903191321n651b86d6i2035280867650780@mail.gmail.com> <20090319211530.GA27605@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> <ab7b49bc0903200814r5f8a6281tacca690869848b7@mail.gmail.com> <49C3D104.50307@gmail.com> <ab7b49bc0903201504x126b3daas5944cb096829c0e@mail.gmail.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:04:00 -0500
Neal Hogan <nealhogan@gmail.com> wrote:
> But, I wonder what the most efficient way is to update ports. I
> appreciate Adam's point about the fact that portupgrade (and
> portmanager and portmaster) are ports themselves and are going to not
> be as reliable as what is in base. 

IMO this doesn't make any sense. If portupgrade is failing on a port
where manual "make install" works, then portupgrade simply has a bug.
Any port upgrading tool belongs in a port, because it's more important
that it responds to changes in the ports system than changes in the
base system. 

As to upgrading piecemeal rather than with -a, I don't see how that
helps, and it may actually make things worse by not building in
dependency order.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090321014413.42ce80b2>