Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Saturday 05 August 2006 19:16, cpghost wrote: How do I get portmanager to upgrade ports, using 1. pre-built packages from /usr/ports/packages (ONLY), and only if there's no binary package there, 2. build from source as usual? Additional limit (preventing use of portupgrade -P) is that only local (/usr/ports/packages), and no remote packages should be used. Edit /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf and add ENV['PKG_FETCH'] = '/usr/bin/false' portupgrade will look for a local package, then try and fetch a package remotely using false(1) - which will fail because that's what false(1) does - and portupgrade will then build the port. Jonathan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 10:24:48AM +0200, Jonathan McKeown wrote: On Saturday 05 August 2006 19:16, cpghost wrote: How do I get portmanager to upgrade ports, using 1. pre-built packages from /usr/ports/packages (ONLY), and only if there's no binary package there, 2. build from source as usual? Additional limit (preventing use of portupgrade -P) is that only local (/usr/ports/packages), and no remote packages should be used. Edit /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf and add ENV['PKG_FETCH'] = '/usr/bin/false' portupgrade will look for a local package, then try and fetch a package remotely using false(1) - which will fail because that's what false(1) does - and portupgrade will then build the port. That's a great idea for portupgrade! Thank you! It's still not clear how portmanager (instead of portupgrade) would behave, but I'll give it a try. Jonathan Thanks again, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Saturday 05 August 2006 18:16, cpghost wrote: Building packages for multiple machines on a fast CPU, with portmanager's -bu option populates a /usr/ports/packages tree. So far, so good. What I'd like though, is to be able to reuse that tree (mounted via NFS or rsynced over) on other machines with much slower CPUs. The fast build machine and the other slow machines are not synchronized w.r.t. the set of installed ports. What is needed is that portmanager uses packages from /usr/ports/packages if available, and compiles from source the remaining ports. A key design feature of portmanager is that everything is built with up-to-date dependencies, having this kind of feature would, in general, defeat that. In any case according to the man page -b means Keep backup packages of the old versions. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:03:00PM +0100, RW wrote: On Saturday 05 August 2006 18:16, cpghost wrote: Building packages for multiple machines on a fast CPU, with portmanager's -bu option populates a /usr/ports/packages tree. So far, so good. What I'd like though, is to be able to reuse that tree (mounted via NFS or rsynced over) on other machines with much slower CPUs. The fast build machine and the other slow machines are not synchronized w.r.t. the set of installed ports. What is needed is that portmanager uses packages from /usr/ports/packages if available, and compiles from source the remaining ports. A key design feature of portmanager is that everything is built with up-to-date dependencies, having this kind of feature would, in general, defeat that. Why would that? The port trees themselves are synchronized; just the set of installed ports ain't. The packages generated on the different machines are absolutely identical AFAICS; including their dependencies. There's no point in recompiling them separately if the result is the same on all machines. That's why I'd like to reuse the newly created packages. In any case according to the man page -b means Keep backup packages of the old versions. From portmanager(1): -bu or --back-up Make packages of updated ports The new/updated ports are being created with pkg_create(1) (after compilation). It's not about old versions... Thanks, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Monday 07 August 2006 16:12, cpghost wrote: On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:03:00PM +0100, RW wrote: A key design feature of portmanager is that everything is built with up-to-date dependencies, having this kind of feature would, in general, defeat that. Why would that? The port trees themselves are synchronized; just the set of installed ports ain't. The packages generated on the different machines are absolutely identical AFAICS; including their dependencies. There's no point in recompiling them separately if the result is the same on all machines. That's why I'd like to reuse the newly created packages. But it would be very complicated for portmanager to determine whether a package file meets it's exacting standards for up-to-date, especially since most people that would want to use such a feature, would want to get 6-stable packages. The developer always said that he wanted it to be a simple way of keeping a system up-to-date from source, and not general purpose ports/package tool. And AFAIK he's lost interest in it. What you might do is compile your collection of packages, install them with portupgrade and optionally run portmanager after to clean up any problems. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Using pre-built packages with portmanager
On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 05:40:23PM +0100, RW wrote: On Monday 07 August 2006 16:12, cpghost wrote: On Mon, Aug 07, 2006 at 04:03:00PM +0100, RW wrote: A key design feature of portmanager is that everything is built with up-to-date dependencies, having this kind of feature would, in general, defeat that. Why would that? The port trees themselves are synchronized; just the set of installed ports ain't. The packages generated on the different machines are absolutely identical AFAICS; including their dependencies. There's no point in recompiling them separately if the result is the same on all machines. That's why I'd like to reuse the newly created packages. But it would be very complicated for portmanager to determine whether a package file meets it's exacting standards for up-to-date, especially since most people that would want to use such a feature, would want to get 6-stable packages. The developer always said that he wanted it to be a simple way of keeping a system up-to-date from source, and not general purpose ports/package tool. And AFAIK he's lost interest in it. That's sad. It was such a nice tool. What you might do is compile your collection of packages, install them with portupgrade and optionally run portmanager after to clean up any problems. Yup, that's the trick! Thanks again for the hints! :) Regards, -cpghost. -- Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
