Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 08:14:46 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: How did upgrading applications happen before portupgrade etc? Message-ID: <20070813081446.6nxh47n64ocg8ksk@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20070812181810.2b17d85f@gumby.homeunix.com.> References: <20070811115642.L34115@obelix.home.rakhesh.com> <20070811083357.GA34007@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20070811145314.A47727@obelix.home.rakhesh.com> <20070811203322.GA78245@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <20070811225858.7eb933ef@gumby.homeunix.com.> <20070812142059.35077b0d@deskjail> <20070812181810.2b17d85f@gumby.homeunix.com.>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> (from Sun, 12 Aug 2007 =20 18:18:10 +0100): > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 14:20:59 +0200 > Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> wrote: > >> Quoting RW <fbsd06@mlists.homeunix.com> (Sat, 11 Aug 2007 22:58:58 >> +0100): >> >> > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 13:33:22 -0700 >> > Jeremy Chadwick <koitsu@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> > >> > > On Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 03:02:53PM +0400, Rakhesh Sasidharan >> > > wrote: >> > > >> 5. pkg_delete port >> > > > >> > > > I see. In step 5, "pkg_delete port" wont work if port is >> > > > required by others right? So you delete those apps too? Could >> > > > be a lot of stuff to uninstall, right? >> > > >> > > Absolutely correct. That might seem like a nightmare to most >> > > people, but to me it's not. >> > >> > It's not correct, "pkg_delete -f" can force the deletion. I would >> > manually upgrade a port like this: >> > >> > cd /usr/ports/misc/foo >> > make ; do the build >> > pkg_info -qO misc/foo ; get old package name >> > pkg_create -b <old-package-name> ; backup existing package >> > /usr/local/etc/rc.d/foo stop ; stop the daemon if needed >> > pkg_delete -f <old-package-name> ; force removal >> > make install >> >> At this point your /var/db/pkg/ directory does not reflect reality >> anymore, > > I know, I was just pointing out that it is possible to upgrade a port > manually without removing every single package that depends on it. > > Actually having dependencies package version mismatches needn't cause > any significant problems. And massaging them into self-consistency is It does cause problems. You have no +REQUIRED_BY file anymore, so =20 pkg_delete allows you to remove it without a warning even if it is =20 still needed. If you make sure to keep the file, you still need to =20 change the dependencies (in +CONTENTS and in +REQUIRED_BY), else the =20 entries in +REQUIRED_BY are not removed on deinstall of a port. > itself a form of corruption, since you lose information about what was > built against what. No, it's not a corruption as long as the changes are ABI compatible =20 (if it isn't compatible, you need to update some more ports, but this =20 is not the subject of the discussion). The dependency tracking in =20 /var/db is meant to reflect the current dependencies of the installed =20 software, not the dependencies when a port was first build. It doesn't =20 matter for e.g. a viruschecker if rar is at version 1.1 or 1.2, as =20 long as the command line options used still have the same syntax and =20 semantic. Bye, Alexander. --=20 I'll burn my books. =09=09-- Christopher Marlowe http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070813081446.6nxh47n64ocg8ksk>