Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 18:55:51 -0500 From: The Anarcat <anarcat@anarcat.ath.cx> To: Aristedes Maniatis <ari@ish.com.au> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: update strategies Message-ID: <20021207235551.GA617@lenny.anarcat.ath.cx> In-Reply-To: <4E52AD12-0A3E-11D7-86ED-003065A9024A@ish.com.au> References: <20021206051136.GA1150@lenny.anarcat.ath.cx> <4E52AD12-0A3E-11D7-86ED-003065A9024A@ish.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--huq684BweRXVnRxX
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It's pretty simple. Some applications are "part of" FreeBSD (ie. "in
base"), and they are therefore tested and adapted to the FreeBSD
environment, they are maintained in FreeBSD's main source code
repository, etc. This gives much more control over the software.
In opposition, software in ports is integrated in FreeBSD only
loosly. A good example is why lukemftpd is not part of base yet: it
lacks complete PAM support, FreeBSD's login.conf support, MAC and such
stuff.
Normally, if you want to upgrade your sshd, you have 3 choices, 2 of
which are really similar:
1- recompile only sshd
2- recompile sshd using buildworld
3- disable the base sshd and install the port
I guess you tried choice 3, but failed to disable sshd in the base
system. Look for NO_SSHD or something like that in make.conf to
disable the building of sshd.
Also their is a OPENSSH_OVERWRITE_BASE knob for the openssh port that
will happily destroy the base system's sshd to replace it with the
port.
A.
On Sun Dec 08, 2002 at 10:47:54AM +1100, Aristedes Maniatis wrote:
> Thank you for your response. It was very helpful.
>=20
> But I still don't understand why certain applications are both in the=20
> FreeBSD distribution and also in ports. So, now I've got sshd both in=20
> /usr/local/bin and also in /usr/bin. Their respective config files are=20
> in /usr/local/etc/ssh and /etc/ssh. So I've got two daemons, and two=20
> sets of config files which has been really confusing since I've been=20
> editing the wrong ones. rc.conf points to the ports copy and ensures=20
> that one starts up at boot. But I'm obviously doing something wrong to=20
> get into this situation with two copies of the application.
>=20
> It is easier to keep the port version updated, because that doesn't=20
> require a whole buildworld. Should I throw the other one away?
>=20
> Thanks
> Ari Maniatis
>=20
>=20
> BTW: I solved my kernel compilation problem (I had to "make cleandir" =20
> as well as the usual "make clean"). Thanks.
>=20
>=20
> On Friday, December 6, 2002, at 04:11 PM, The Anarcat wrote:
>=20
> >>I guess what makes more more confused is figuring out what is part of
> >>"FreeBSD" and what is part of the ports. Some things seem to be both:
> >>eg. perl and bind. Is there a map somewhere that sets this out=20
> >>clearly?
> >
> >Yes. I guess you could say that everything that is in /usr/src is part
> >of *base*, with all source code included, and all that is in
> >/usr/ports is part of The Ports Collection (c).
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------->
> ish group pty ltd
> 7 Darghan St Glebe 2037 Australia
> phone +61 2 9660 1400 fax +61 2 9660 7400
> http www.ish.com.au | email info@ish.com.au
> PGP fingerprint 08 57 20 4B 80 69 59 E2 A9 BF 2D 48 C2 20 0C C8
>=20
--=20
Imagination is more important than knowledge
- Albert Einstein
--huq684BweRXVnRxX
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQE98oqHttcWHAnWiGcRApApAJ9ECeV493i827wHodQ8GHaTv0GPagCeN2Nu
yXMDdiPcr7FplLE+oMRJatI=
=8POi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--huq684BweRXVnRxX--
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021207235551.GA617>