Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 19:18:28 -0800 From: Kent Stewart <kstewart@owt.com> To: Andrew J Caines <A.J.Caines@halplant.com>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvsup ports and portupgrade -rva . Message-ID: <200401301918.28812.kstewart@owt.com> In-Reply-To: <20040130200617.GQ78925@hal9000.halplant.com> References: <401910EA.8090102@updegrove.net> <40194920.7080003@updegrove.net> <20040130200617.GQ78925@hal9000.halplant.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 30 January 2004 12:06 pm, Andrew J Caines wrote: > Rick, > > > What is the preferred method to keep the installed ports and ports > > trees synced between identical servers? > > If you explicitly want to keep ports trees on multiple systems in > sync, then the canonical method is to use cvsup to update from the > mirrors to a server, then use cvs to update the clients (including > the "server"). > > On the other hand if you only want to keep the ports themselves in > sync, then the two likely approaches are sharing the ports tree and > distributing packages. > > Sharing the tree means that you can easily build and install for > multiple architectures, or for a single architecture you can update > and build on one system and install on many. I've not tried it, but > I'd imaging that something like "portupgrade --noclean --nocleanup > --all" would run nicely on the client systems. > > If you don't like sharing filesystems, you can build and package on > one system (for each architecture), then distribute those packages to > the other systems. > That is how I do it. I have one system that I use to build INDEX and INDEX.db and ftp those to the other systems. The port tree is updated between when my cvs-mirror is updated. I have a cvsupd running as a cronjob and use cvsup to update the local machines. I update the mirror every 4 hours and that gives me time to produce an identical port tree on the other machines. Rather than nfs_mount, I wildcard ftp the packages to the other machines and use portupgrade -Puf to do the actual upgrade. The system running Apache-2.0.48 has to maintain Apache because that is the only system running it and it takes awhile. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200401301918.28812.kstewart>