Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 06:05:40 +0500 From: "Iain Dooley" <iain_dooley@hotmail.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Updating source code manually Message-ID: <BAY15-F11fWM5nWGsRw00004a38@hotmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
thanks all for your suggestions. i'll refrain from running the portupgrade on KDE whilst KDE is running. as for the patch procedures you guys suggested, i'm actually looking for a way to do it without using the ports system at all. the problem is that kdebase takes so long to build, and as we have already discussed i can't run it whilst running KDE, and it's a rare occassion that i can afford to be without my PC for that long, and there is no individual port for Kate. the patch i've received is about 10 lines of code and the problem that it solves is _extremely_ minor, so if there is no way to rebuild Kate without rebuilding all of KDEBase, then i probably won't bother :-) but that was some great info for future reference if ever i want to apply a patch locally to verify it before sending it to the port maintainer. thanks very much everyone. cheers iain >From: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> >To: "Iain Dooley" <iain_dooley@hotmail.com> >Subject: Updating source code manually >Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2004 23:20:17 -0400 > > > >Hello: > > > 1) i received a small patch for Kate (K Advanced Text Editor) > > from one of the developers, how can i compile this new code into > > the binary? > > Once you've confirmed the patch works, _please_ get the >developer's permission and submit it to the port maintainer(s). >You may not be the only one suffering. > > > 2) this question may be answered by any information provided in > > answer to my first question, but how can i upgrade specific > > components of KDE (such as Kate) without upgrading the entire KDE > > installation (which takes a couple of days) > > For something as complex as KDE, a proper upgrade will almost >always drag along new versions of infrastructure. > > > 3) Is it safe to do a portupgrade of KDE whilst KDE is still > > running? > > It will probably not be lethal, but it is not safe computing >practice. > During execution, many programs and shared libraries leave most >of the read-only portion of code on disk and reload it when needed. > Let's say KDE uses libfoo.1.5.so, which is actually v1.5.7. >You upgrade something, which upgrades libfoo.1.5.so to v1.5.8. The >kernel (unaware of the change) reloads part of the file and restarts >execution at a particular address. Will that address valid code? > Maybe. But if it isn't the shared library will crash, likely >taking KDE with it. Even if it _is_ valid code, it may not be >compatible with the old version. Best case, the program crashes. >Worst case, ongoing and invisible data corruption with no hint of >cause. > The reality is people (including me) do it. If you choose to >do so, know the risks. > > > Robert Huff > > _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY15-F11fWM5nWGsRw00004a38>