Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2002 03:17:50 +0200 From: Thomas Seck <tmseck-lists@netcologne.de> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Package system flaws? Message-ID: <20020713011750.GA755@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> In-Reply-To: <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <20020706220511.GA88651@scoobysnax.jaded.net> <3D27A296.D58FB4B4@softweyr.com> <p05111745b94e9452f3b3@[128.113.24.47]> <p05111700b953ed16c118@[128.113.24.47]> <p05111701b953f38542f8@[128.113.24.47]> <20020712121427.GD3678@lummux.tchpc.tcd.ie> <20020712144854.GA756@laurel.tmseck.homedns.org> <20020713054141.A26277@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Greg Lewis (glewis@eyesbeyond.com): > On Fri, Jul 12, 2002 at 04:48:54PM +0200, Thomas Seck wrote: > > * Robert bobb Crosbie (bobb+freebsd-arch@redbrick.dcu.ie): > > > > > I built apache2 with ``WITH_SUEXEC=yes'', then after the chunking thing > > > I did a ``portupgrade apache'', apache no longer works, scratched head > > > for a while until I rememberd how I buile it origionally. > > > > portupgrade can handle this. /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf.sample tells > > you how to do it. > > Thats both of the problems: > > (a) portupgrade isn't part of the standard package system. > (b) I have to do it. I already told the packaging system what I wanted > when I built the port, I shouldn't have to tell it again. The person I was replying to explicitly claimed that he wedged his apache update with portupgrade. Had he bothered to read the sample configuration or the documentation, he would have quickly learned how to avoid this. But I agree with you. A tool like portupgrade should not exist (and it should not have been written in Ruby - yet another dependency to track). The inability of the present ports and package system to maintain a consistent package database is apalling. The way dependencies are recorded is plain broken. In my opinion when specify a dependency, the minimum working requirement should be specified (e.g. 'gmake 3.79.1, do not care about VERSION or REVISION'). The package installer should decide at installation time via a package db lookup whether a locally installed package fulfills the minimum requirement and record the dependencies according to what was actually found on the system. When a depending package is not present or outdated, a recursive update should be done. The same applies for the ports system. At present, the dependencies in the package db reflect the state of the ports tree at build time but not the state of packages present on the system. -- Thomas Seck To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020713011750.GA755>