Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 02:24:26 -0500 From: Ryan Coleman <ryan.coleman@cwis.biz> To: perryh@pluto.rain.com Cc: jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Free BSD 8.1 Message-ID: <5711C7AE-92FD-4ECA-B0DC-2CF91A10B809@cwis.biz> In-Reply-To: <4ca19305.qVDnt7/ifQhIrQ0c%perryh@pluto.rain.com> References: <20100926123019.GA41450@lpthe.jussieu.fr> <4C9F3BBA.2060809@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4ca03df2.lQjjNnRah4BJhw4Y%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <201009271016.26902.jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk> <4ca19305.qVDnt7/ifQhIrQ0c%perryh@pluto.rain.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sep 28, 2010, at 2:02 AM, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > Mike Clarke <jmc-freebsd2@milibyte.co.uk> wrote: >> On Monday 27 September 2010, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: >>> I've recently started on a new system, and am planning to >>> install 8.1-RELEASE, including the corresponding ports tree; >>> then install what ports I can from packages and also fetch the >>> corresponding distfiles; and finally build -- from release- >>> corresponding ports -- any that aren't available as packages or >>> where I want non-default OPTION settings. That approach should >>> avoid most nasty surprises while getting things set up and >>> working. _After_ everything is installed and configured >>> properly will be plenty soon enough to consider whether any >>> ports need to be updated -- and the already-installed-and- >>> working package collection will provide a fallback in case >>> of trouble trying to build any updated versions. >>=20 >> The problem is if/when you need to update a port as a result of >> a security advisory. If your ports tree is very much out of date >> then it's likely that updating that one port will require a number >> of dependencies to be updated as well, sometimes all the ports >> depending on one or more of the updated dependencies need to be >> updated as well and the resultant bag of worms can take quite a >> lot of sorting out. The "little and often" approach of keeping >> the ports tree up to date could be less traumatic. >=20 > and, in this context, your point is? >=20 > I'm advocating starting from a stable and self-consistent baseline, > consisting of a release _and_ its corresponding port/package > collection, and then considering whether any updates are needed. > Isn't that orthogonal to the question of whether or not to follow > ports updates, once the baseline has been established? As I understand it: The OS itself is stable, but the ports are = constantly in flux and may be issues. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5711C7AE-92FD-4ECA-B0DC-2CF91A10B809>