From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 20 15:38:17 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24BCD106566B for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 15:38:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx01.qsc.de (mx01.qsc.de [213.148.129.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46CF8FC16 for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 15:38:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-63-204.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.63.204]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43F73D8B5; Fri, 20 May 2011 17:38:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id p4KFcEZP001868; Fri, 20 May 2011 17:38:14 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:38:13 +0200 From: Polytropon To: Xn Nooby Message-Id: <20110520173813.85cbf142.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alejandro Imass , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Over-whelmed by ports and package tools X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 15:38:17 -0000 On Fri, 20 May 2011 10:26:11 -0400, Xn Nooby wrote: > > Also try to go with portsnap for ports IMHO it's the path of least > > resistance ;-) > > I will try portsnap, and read about the pkgdb database. If all these > tools ultimately resolve to pkgdb, I will try to learn about that. I think pkgdb (often used as "pkgdb -aF") belongs to portinstall / portupgrade, and it keeps things in sync when you use different installing methods side by side (which is possible), e. g. # pkg_add -r bla # portinstall foo/urgz # cd /usr/ports/baz/bar # make install In this case, running "pkgdb -aF" before and after each installation (or upgrading or removing) step makes sure nothing gets "installed twice". If you use portmaster for maintaining your ports, you should be safe. Using portsnap to obtain a current ports tree is a common way. If you need it "more current", use csup. Here is an explaination text I did already post to the list: Step 1: Add this to /etc/make.conf: SUP_UPDATE= yes SUP= /usr/bin/csup SUPFLAGS= -g -L 2 SUPHOST= cvsup.freebsd.org PORTSSUPFILE= /etc/sup/ports.sup Step 2: Create /etc/sup/ports.sup: *default host=cvsup.freebsd.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=. *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress ports-all Note: You can use a different cvsup host and can also exclude port categories from being updated (e. g. for languages you do not use, or kinds of programs you are not interested in). See /usr/share/examples/cvsup/ports-supfile for more details, it's very well documented (here: in comments). Step 3: Perform the update # cd /usr/ports # make update Now you have a _current_ ports tree. Note: A similar method works for the system sources. Add SUPFILE= /etc/sup/stable.sup to /etc/make.conf and create /etc/sup/stable.sup like this: *default host=cvsup.freebsd.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8 *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress src-all This will give you 8-STABLE. Use "tag=RELENG_8.0" for 8.0-pX (security branch, just as freebsd-update would do), and if you need RELEASE, use "tag=RELENG_8.0.0". Then, # cd /usr/src # make update # make buildworld buildkernel See /usr/src/Makefile (comment section) for which make targets are defined and in which order you must proceed for a system upgrade based on sources. More info here: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/cvs-tags.html > I have tried PC-BSD, and look forward to version 9.0. I really don't > like KDE, though. I've _tried_ to like it, but that wasn't a big success. :-) > I hear some rumblings about a Gnome developer > wanting to drop BSD support, so maybe I better start liking KDE. It is currently discussed to turn Gnome into a kind of Linux distribution, if I understood this correctly. Of course it implies that Gnome _itself_ will drop support for Solaris and the BSDs, and maybe all other operating systems that do not run the Linux kernel (e. g. Debian running a FreeBSD or HURD kernel, maybe even mobile devices?). But on the other hand, this is free software, so anyone who wants to port Gnome to non-Linux is free to do so. > PC-BSD seems to have done a great job reproducing the way Mac's > install software, by using self-contained bundles (PBI's). In my opinion, this is not optimal. Software should be managed by the system, not by downloading things using a web browser... but at least there are command line tools to deal with PBI, so all the annoying interaction during an installation process can be omitted. But on the other hand, this is what people seem to be used to, so why not distribute software this strange way? :-) > And next > version of PBI is supposed to not need a GUI. I thought it would already be existing??? > I'm sure I will be > trying the next version PC-BSD. Hopefully to be released soon. If you want a preconfigured system and don't mind the sloppy support for the german language, PC-BSD is a very good piece of software. Still I have to express Mr. Horse's primary opinion about it. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...