Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:02:46 +0100 From: Mel <fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Bogdan =?utf-8?q?=C4=86ulibrk?= <bc@default.co.yu> Subject: Re: It is safe to build ports for 7.0 from a 6.3 chroot? Message-ID: <200803041402.47267.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> In-Reply-To: <47CD3B79.7070607@default.co.yu> References: <20080303200933.GA909@gauss.sanabria.es> <200803040214.50082.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <47CD3B79.7070607@default.co.yu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 04 March 2008 13:07:21 Bogdan =C4=86ulibrk wrote:
> Mel wrote:
> | Minimize downtime of services provided by ports?
> |
> | Jose: take a look at Tinderbox - it does exactly what you want to do:
>
> build
>
> | ports for OS release X on OS release Y, using chroot. If you're unsure
>
> about
>
> | your own method, because of OSVERSION or similar, do it using Tinderbox.
>
> IMHO, the usual procedure described in handbook will satisfy 95% of
> upgrade scenarios. Others can install compat6x port right after (or
> before) reboot.
And then upgrade all ports, while the services are running?
> In any case, be free to try whatever scenario works for you, but I would
> ~ not like to be the one who inherits server with such 'messy-upgrade' :|
Just cause it doesn't fall into your 95% slice, doesn't make it messy. It's=
in=20
fact cleaner then using compat6x, *because* compat6x doesn't fall into the=
=20
category of potential causes when things don't work.
=46YI: tinderbox is based on the pointyhat build cluster, which makes all=20
the 'messy' packages for the FreeBSD package servers.
=2D-=20
Mel
Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules
and never get to the software part.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200803041402.47267.fbsd.questions>