Re: Newbie questions about updating
Hi, let me give some very basic answers. cothrige wrote: ports system is completely separate from the OS itself, and that these Applications have nothing to do with the operating system. In theory at least. Practically it is more limited. can be upgraded or updated separately. From what I can see this seems Yes, as long as the port tree still supports the OS. A strange example: FreeBSD 1.0 is not supported anymore with the current port tree. to most often involve CVSup, and I have been operating under the Yes. assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? It seems for me to be the best choice. Assuming I am, my main confusion concerns just how these two systems actually interact and relate to each other, and whether there are any They do not interact. The operating system provides the base for the applications. As long as base and application fit together, it all simply works. requirements connecting updating each of them together? For instance, There is no requirement. Upgrading the operating system should be done if there are bug fixes provides or if you want to switch to a newer version. I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the Just stick with 6.2 for the moment. basic installation and setup. Now at some point if I wish to update the ports does that mean I have to update the OS to a particular No problem. level? If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? Is there any connection between how current the ports are and how current the OS is? Wait, you do not install ports from the disc, you install packages from the disc. This is a small difference. Ports are source based, packages are binaries. One of the things which caused me to wonder about this was that some time back I tried FreeBSD out for a while and ran into some oddities concerning the ports system. When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that. That struck me as odd, Updating the ports tree means actually switching to ports but you still can use packages via portupgrade. and because of it I always had a suspicion that I had broken the system with my out of whack updates (I did not move up to stable at that time) but I just never could really find out if that were so. Never forget, the ports tree is a live object. It can happen that you upgrade now and find a ruined system, then upgrade a minute later and the system is fine again. One last newb question is concerning cvsup itself. In reference to ports is there a difference, in the end, between this and portsnap? There should be no difference at the final end. Erich ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote: 2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other ports. Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalent to cvsup part of the base system now? -- Dave ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
Predrag Punosevac wrote: I am not sure. I know that portsnap is the part of base package. dgmm wrote: On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote: 2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other ports. Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalent to cvsup part of the base system now? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] It is actually. No need whatsoever to install cvsup now, just use csup ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
Lars Eighner writes: assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? [deletia] Many people do it it two operations because they really are two different things. Another reason is to (theoretically) limit possible damage is things Go Horribly Wrong and make the post-mortem easier. I have a cron job that updates the base OS, the docs (a separate entity), and the ports every night at midnight. Once it connects, the update take less than five minutes. (Except for rare occasions.) Aside from bugs introduced by my attempts to improve the script, this has run without porblem for years. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
Hi, I can't answer all your questions, but will take a shot at a couple. You should check out the handbook at: http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports.html and http://www.FreeBSD.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/porters-handbook/ For more complete information. On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:35:39AM -0500, cothrige wrote: I know this is going to be a very dumb question, but I just can't seem to get my mind around exactly what is involved and what I should do regarding this issue. I understand from reading the handbook that the ports system is completely separate from the OS itself, and that these can be upgraded or updated separately. From what I can see this seems to most often involve CVSup, and I have been operating under the assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? No, not quite. They are two separate things, but can be run from the same supfile in the same csup run.By the way, cvsup has been replaced by csup which is now in the base system from about 6.2 on. or maybe it was 6.1. Here is the relevant part of my supfile: -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- # *default host=cvsup.FreeBSD.org *default base=/var/db *default prefix=/usr *default tag=RELENG_6_2 *default release=cvs *default delete use-rel-suffix *default compress ## Main Source Tree. # The easiest way to get the main source tree is to use the src-all # mega-collection. It includes all of the individual src-* collections. src-all ports-all tag=. doc-all tag=. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This gets 6.2 OS and the latest ports and docs. You could put tag=RELENG_6 and get the latest OS updates for 6.xx (but not the latest over all) included. Assuming I am, my main confusion concerns just how these two systems actually interact and relate to each other, and whether there are any requirements connecting updating each of them together? For instance, I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the basic installation and setup. Now at some point if I wish to update the ports does that mean I have to update the OS to a particular level? If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? Is there any connection between how current the ports are and how current the OS is? They do interact and there can be problems. The OS has versions. The ports tree does not. It is just the latest that has been supplied by the port maintainer. As the OS gets older, it becomes more likely that a giver port is too new for it and may not build or run on it. It can happen the other way around too - the OS is too new for the present condition of the port. But, there is an attempt to keep this from happening. When the head of an OS branch is getting to the point of making a new RELEASE, then a freeze is put on code in the OS thus making a temporary non-moving target to build all the system plus the ports against. It is generally up to the port maintainers to make sure their port[s] can build to that frozen image. When all seems to build, run and test together then a RELEASE is made. Then the branch is unfrozen and changes start coming in again - both to the base OS and to the ports. In general, the OS versions are managed so that anything that will run in one version of a main branch will run in another. eg, if it will run in 6.1, it should run in 6.2 and 6.3. But it may well not work in 7.xx because os some non-compatible change introduced in the new major branch level. That is the main part of the decision to create a new main branch and what usually determines whether some change will be introduced in a lower branch or reserved for a higher branch. But, again, the ports are not limited to a version so in some cases, especially when signiicant time has elapsed, a port may not build or run on some version. You may need to go back and get a legacy version of the port to make it run, or note the changes and tinker. In practice, though, it usually works well to keep your OS and ports up to date. Developers and maintainers try to make things work and to keep them compatible as far as possible. jerry One of the things which caused me to wonder about this was that some time back I tried FreeBSD out for a while and ran into some oddities concerning the ports system. When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that. That struck me as odd, and because of it I always had a suspicion that I had broken the system with my out of whack updates (I did not move up to stable at that time) but I just never could really find out if that were so. One
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On 9/7/07, Lars Eighner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, cothrige wrote: assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? No. It is not must. You can update your source and your ports tree with one supfile. You can add the line [snip] Many people do it it two operations because they really are two different things. Okay, that seems to confirm my basic understanding then. I must readily admit that the overall application is a bit above me at this point (it is certainly more complicated than the aptitude update and aptitude upgrade that I am used to.). At least though I appear to be on the right track about how the two are different entities in some manner. There is no necessary, hard and fast, connection between the two. If your ports tree gets very, very stale, it will largely cease to work because many (some) of the source files will disappear or their dependencies will disappear or change. Okay, this makes sense to me. General, upgrading the OS is a good idea about six months after the second release of a major version number (i.e. when 7.2 or 7.3 is a release and is about six-months old). So, you would say that there is no pressing need to update the OS yet? If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? No. In fact you shouldn't. (But as mentioned above, never use any tag with ports except ..) Of course there are two different things here that you might be confusing. The ports tree, which is a skeleton for building applications from scratch, and packages, which are pre-built binaries for applications. Yes, I think I am probably confusing them at least to a degree. Probably that is because it just seems logical that the packages would match what is in the ports tree and it is hard for me to imagine it may not be the case. If my ports tree has a particular version of an app in it, say mplayer-1.0.7 wouldn't the package available be the same? I also wonder about this because portupgrade, which is obviously for ports, does have the option for using packages. It does make me wonder, how does pkg_add or portupgrade know which versions of which packages to retrieve, as opposed to using the port to know which version of the port to install? Does that make sense? I feel like I am being very awkward in my wording, and I apologize for not being more clear in it. Here's the best way to install 6.2 starting with the CD release (assuming you have internet connectivity which I guess you do since you mailed to this list). 1. Install 6.2 including source, but do not install Xorg. [snip] 6. Install Xorg (and other applications you may want) from the ports tree. Very good to know. Unfortunately, I did not use this way to get started, but next time I will certainly follow your suggestions as even now I can see how they would help. Installing X from the disc was not the best choice, but being used to Linux installers it seemed logical at the time. As did installing the ports tree. [snip] The main object is to keep the ports in synch with other ports. There are just a few ports that do things (like build loadable kernel modules) which just won't work if they are too out of synch with the operating system, but these are few and far between. I think I understand. So, I can update the ports x number of times per a given period of time, but I don't have to update the OS as often. They are not so intimately connected that I have to keep them in sync somehow with one another, and therefore updating them at different rates will not cause breakage, am I right? When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that More than likely the packages were broken. Often the available packages are way out of date or do not exist (because of licensing restrictions or no one got around to building them). Packages depend to much greater extent on the OS release. Very interesting. But, could that really explain a 100% failure rate? In my previous experience with FreeBSD I became convinced that I had broken things badly since after updating I was unable to use even one package. I mean, no big deal in itself, and if the system had no package options I would have no real complaint. But, it just seemed broken as it was, and so I was convinced that I had done something wrong. Portsnap is a different system from cvsup. They should get approximately the same tree (not exactly the same because the ports tree changes so rapidly). Portsnap is usually run automatically (as a cron job) every few days, or oftener if you are really complusive. It is said to save bandwidth if used this way, so if you are administering a large system, it probably pays off. If this
Re: Newbie questions about updating
That is the correct but I prefer to use portsnap for ports and keep cvsup just for core OS! Robert Huff wrote: Lars Eighner writes: assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? [deletia] Many people do it it two operations because they really are two different things. Another reason is to (theoretically) limit possible damage is things Go Horribly Wrong and make the post-mortem easier. I have a cron job that updates the base OS, the docs (a separate entity), and the ports every night at midnight. Once it connects, the update take less than five minutes. (Except for rare occasions.) Aside from bugs introduced by my attempts to improve the script, this has run without porblem for years. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
cothrige [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other responses, it is looking like perhaps that is not the best method, and maybe I should have skipped that and then added the ports after the install using cvsup or such. This is certainly a good thing to know for the future, though as of right now I am dealing with the disc install method. That works fine, but to save yourself a bit of annoyance later, see the cvsup FAQ for how to adopt that ports tree before trying to update it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 12:16:32 -0400 Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In general, the OS versions are managed so that anything that will run in one version of a main branch will run in another. eg, if it will run in 6.1, it should run in 6.2 and 6.3. But it may well not work in 7.xx because os some non-compatible change introduced in the new major branch level. Generally packages built on an older version of the OS will run on a newer version. When one upgrades to 7x there will be a compat6x port to supply the missing libraries. It's normally not essential to upgrade ports after an OS upgrade, but it is advisable on a major upgrade. Problems are more likely to occur the other way around, there are currently 6-stable packages the wont run on 6.2 because new libraries have been ported into 6-stable. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
I am not sure. I know that portsnap is the part of base package. dgmm wrote: On Friday 07 September 2007, Lars Eighner wrote: 2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other ports. Isn't csup, a functional and faster equivalent to cvsup part of the base system now? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, cothrige wrote: assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? No. It is not must. You can update your source and your ports tree with one supfile. You can add the line ports-all tag=. to either the standard or the stable supfile. The tag=. part is vitally important, because otherwise the tag from the system update will fall through (being right now either RELENG_6 (for stable) or RELENG_6_2 (for standard) and your whole ports tree will be deleted (because ports do not have a tag and so there are not any that match either of the other tags). If you do this once, you will forever be prejudiced against doing it in one operation. Many people do it it two operations because they really are two different things. Assuming I am, my main confusion concerns just how these two systems actually interact and relate to each other, and whether there are any requirements connecting updating each of them together? There is no necessary, hard and fast, connection between the two. If your ports tree gets very, very stale, it will largely cease to work because many (some) of the source files will disappear or their dependencies will disappear or change. Many of the applications in the ports were not written to work specifically on FreeBSD by FreeBSD developers, but were written variously to work on any generally sort-of-Unix-like system, any system with a C++ compiler and so forth. Theoretically ports in a very old tree should build (FreeBSD keeps many old distribution files as a last resort), but as a practical matter, many won't. Occasionally there is a change in the operating system that breaks some old ports, often because the person who wrote the port was sloppy and took things for granted, but those things changed. For instance, I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the basic installation and setup. Now at some point if I wish to update the ports does that mean I have to update the OS to a particular level? No. There certainly is no fixed point at which ports will become useless. But someday 6,2 will no longer be supported (like years from now). 6.2 will still run on the machine you have got, and the ports you have installed will still run on it, but much of the then current port tree will deal with hardware you don't have and so forth. When the Donovan's Brain Interface is invented 6.2 won't support it and you will want it because it is easier to think than to find your mouse (although I can think of an operating system that is designed for people who have it the other way around). General, upgrading the OS is a good idea about six months after the second release of a major version number (i.e. when 7.2 or 7.3 is a release and is about six-months old). If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? No. In fact you shouldn't. (But as mentioned above, never use any tag with ports except ..) Of course there are two different things here that you might be confusing. The ports tree, which is a skeleton for building applications from scratch, and packages, which are pre-built binaries for applications. Here's the best way to install 6.2 starting with the CD release (assuming you have internet connectivity which I guess you do since you mailed to this list). 1. Install 6.2 including source, but do not install Xorg. 2. Install cvsup from a package or the ports, but do not install any other ports. 3. Use cvsup to update the release source (use the standard supfile). 4. Build and install world and the kernel according to instructions at the end of the UPDATING file in /usr/src 5. Cvsup the ports tree using the ports-supfile. 6. Install Xorg (and other applications you may want) from the ports tree. Well, 5a is install ports management software from the ports-mgmt section of the ports tree. I use portupgrade because it is the way I have always done things, but I hear some of the others may be better. You can use the -N switch with it when you are installing fresh ports instead of just upgrading. 6.2 is now fairly static (but it isn't STABLE) so you will only rarely see anything happening when you cvsup with the standard supfile. If anything does happen it is usually error-correction/diasater-avoidance related, so you probably should rebuild the system (or at least read the UPDATING file to see if the changes really affect something that is important to you). The ports tree, on the other hand, will usually have dozens of updates every day. After the usually flurry of basic applications you install at first, you probably should update the ports tree, read the ports UPDATING file and upgrade all your ports (like portupgrade -a) before you install any major application. The main object is to keep the ports in synch with other ports. There
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On 9/7/07, Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote: Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other responses, it is looking like perhaps that is not the best method, and maybe I should have skipped that and then added the ports after the install using cvsup or such. This is certainly a good thing to know for the future, though as of right now I am dealing with the disc install method. No. You were right to choose yes. That just installs the ports tree skeleton. It does not install any actual ports. Then when you do a csup tag=. for the ports tree, then it updates that tree. But you would still have to update the ports from the tree that you have chosen to install. What exactly is the best method for the new install when it comes to ports? I should say yes to installing the ports tree, but then how should I go forward at that point? For instance, should I immediately run csup when booting into the new system before actually installing anything from ports? Will that speed things up in the end, or make for greater stability? The ports tree from one version of the OS to the next is not particularly different. It is just instructions on how to get the source and build the port (including dependant ports). It gets a little out of date now and then as the list of files that need to be downloaded or build procedured change, so it need a csup update now and then. But what that csup does is update the skeleton, not the actual ports. That is a subsequent step. Cool, that makes sense. I suppose right now it is a matter of figuring out just getting used to how to handle the system and know that I am carrying out the correct steps, or at least the most reliable steps, in the most beneficial order. Thanks, Patrick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote: On 9/7/07, Erich Dollansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Howdy, and thanks for the help. [snip] I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the Just stick with 6.2 for the moment. Wait, you do not install ports from the disc, you install packages from the disc. This is a small difference. Ports are source based, packages are binaries. Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other responses, it is looking like perhaps that is not the best method, and maybe I should have skipped that and then added the ports after the install using cvsup or such. This is certainly a good thing to know for the future, though as of right now I am dealing with the disc install method. No. You were right to choose yes. That just installs the ports tree skeleton. It does not install any actual ports. Then when you do a csup tag=. for the ports tree, then it updates that tree. But you would still have to update the ports from the tree that you have chosen to install. The ports tree from one version of the OS to the next is not particularly different. It is just instructions on how to get the source and build the port (including dependant ports). It gets a little out of date now and then as the list of files that need to be downloaded or build procedured change, so it need a csup update now and then. But what that csup does is update the skeleton, not the actual ports. That is a subsequent step. One of the things which caused me to wonder about this was that some time back I tried FreeBSD out for a while and ran into some oddities concerning the ports system. When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that. That struck me as odd, Updating the ports tree means actually switching to ports but you still can use packages via portupgrade. What has happened to me before is that after the fresh install if I typed pkg_add -r foo it would say something like fetching http://...freebsd-6.[x]/foo.1.0.0.tbz...; and then install it. But, after I would update the ports if I typed the same command, pkg_add -r foo, it would fail saying something like fetching http://...freebsd-6.[x]/foo.1.0.1.tbz...; and then say something about no such package. At the time it was happening I had looked at the address being used and of course in the one for freebsd-6.whatever (or whichever directory my OS was trying to fetch from) there was only the foo.1.0.0 file and not the new one. The ports upgrade seemed to make my system stop searching for foo.1.0.0 and begin looking for 1.0.1, but it did not change where the pkg_add program looked and so it would always fail. Most of the time this would be no big deal, and I don't run KDE, Gnome or such, but it is more time consuming (especially on some of my old stuff like this laptop) and more importantly it just always made me think it was broken. It really just doesn't seem like the intended behaviour with it looking for nonexistent packages. When things seem to misbehave like that I always have a sneaking suspicion that not too long in the future it will come crashing down as I have some fundamental setting flawed and with every install or change I am compounding the problem. Never forget, the ports tree is a live object. It can happen that you upgrade now and find a ruined system, then upgrade a minute later and the system is fine again. Yes, I can see how that would be the case, and in a broken port I think that likely this may be so. Also, if the package system does not operate after updating ports then I could also rest easy that things are operating as they should. However, my reading of the handbook, and other documents, implies that one should in theory be able to use packages even with an updated ports tree, as portupgrade -P would seem to suggest. But, in the past that would always fail as the package does not exist in the place being searched and then a port would be built. Again, building is usually fine, and I may even prefer it most of the time, but since portupgrade seems to exist to work with updated ports trees, and it has options to use packages, my experiences with these in the past have given me the distinct impression that I have been doing something wrong. One last newb question is concerning cvsup itself. In reference to ports is there a difference, in the end, between this and portsnap? There should be no difference at the final end. Good to know. Erich Thanks Erich. Patrick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On 9/7/07, Erich Dollansky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Howdy, and thanks for the help. [snip] I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the Just stick with 6.2 for the moment. I had thought this might be the best method, and so figured I would for some time anyway. I am also running FreeBSD on an ancient laptop just for a learning experience, and because so far FreeBSD has been the only system which seems able to run on it :-). For this reason I am tending to keep things fairly small and am trying not to make huge updates unless I have to. level? If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? Is there any connection between how current the ports are and how current the OS is? Wait, you do not install ports from the disc, you install packages from the disc. This is a small difference. Ports are source based, packages are binaries. Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other responses, it is looking like perhaps that is not the best method, and maybe I should have skipped that and then added the ports after the install using cvsup or such. This is certainly a good thing to know for the future, though as of right now I am dealing with the disc install method. One of the things which caused me to wonder about this was that some time back I tried FreeBSD out for a while and ran into some oddities concerning the ports system. When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that. That struck me as odd, Updating the ports tree means actually switching to ports but you still can use packages via portupgrade. What has happened to me before is that after the fresh install if I typed pkg_add -r foo it would say something like fetching http://...freebsd-6.[x]/foo.1.0.0.tbz...; and then install it. But, after I would update the ports if I typed the same command, pkg_add -r foo, it would fail saying something like fetching http://...freebsd-6.[x]/foo.1.0.1.tbz...; and then say something about no such package. At the time it was happening I had looked at the address being used and of course in the one for freebsd-6.whatever (or whichever directory my OS was trying to fetch from) there was only the foo.1.0.0 file and not the new one. The ports upgrade seemed to make my system stop searching for foo.1.0.0 and begin looking for 1.0.1, but it did not change where the pkg_add program looked and so it would always fail. Most of the time this would be no big deal, and I don't run KDE, Gnome or such, but it is more time consuming (especially on some of my old stuff like this laptop) and more importantly it just always made me think it was broken. It really just doesn't seem like the intended behaviour with it looking for nonexistent packages. When things seem to misbehave like that I always have a sneaking suspicion that not too long in the future it will come crashing down as I have some fundamental setting flawed and with every install or change I am compounding the problem. Never forget, the ports tree is a live object. It can happen that you upgrade now and find a ruined system, then upgrade a minute later and the system is fine again. Yes, I can see how that would be the case, and in a broken port I think that likely this may be so. Also, if the package system does not operate after updating ports then I could also rest easy that things are operating as they should. However, my reading of the handbook, and other documents, implies that one should in theory be able to use packages even with an updated ports tree, as portupgrade -P would seem to suggest. But, in the past that would always fail as the package does not exist in the place being searched and then a port would be built. Again, building is usually fine, and I may even prefer it most of the time, but since portupgrade seems to exist to work with updated ports trees, and it has options to use packages, my experiences with these in the past have given me the distinct impression that I have been doing something wrong. One last newb question is concerning cvsup itself. In reference to ports is there a difference, in the end, between this and portsnap? There should be no difference at the final end. Good to know. Erich Thanks Erich. Patrick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newbie questions about updating
I know this is going to be a very dumb question, but I just can't seem to get my mind around exactly what is involved and what I should do regarding this issue. I understand from reading the handbook that the ports system is completely separate from the OS itself, and that these can be upgraded or updated separately. From what I can see this seems to most often involve CVSup, and I have been operating under the assumption that one must run two cvsup operations with two separate supfiles to update both the core OS and the ports. Am I understanding this correctly? Assuming I am, my main confusion concerns just how these two systems actually interact and relate to each other, and whether there are any requirements connecting updating each of them together? For instance, I have downloaded the FreeBSD 6.2 install discs and have finished the basic installation and setup. Now at some point if I wish to update the ports does that mean I have to update the OS to a particular level? If I don't want to run stable and use tag=RELENG_6_2 will I be required to keep the ports as they have installed from the disc? Is there any connection between how current the ports are and how current the OS is? One of the things which caused me to wonder about this was that some time back I tried FreeBSD out for a while and ran into some oddities concerning the ports system. When I first finished setting things up I could install packages using pkg_add -r, but noticed that after updating the ports I could no longer do that. That struck me as odd, and because of it I always had a suspicion that I had broken the system with my out of whack updates (I did not move up to stable at that time) but I just never could really find out if that were so. One last newb question is concerning cvsup itself. In reference to ports is there a difference, in the end, between this and portsnap? Do they result in the same ports? I am sure this is answered somewhere, but the handbook and other sites seem to take a somewhat ground-eye view of how to use them but don't dwell much on the mysteries behind what they do and how they may differ. Many thanks for any clarification that can be offered to me on these things. Patrick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Newbie questions about updating
On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 12:26:40PM -0500, cothrige wrote: On 9/7/07, Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 10:53:09AM -0500, cothrige wrote: Sorry. What I really had in mind was the ports tree itself, which I had an option during install to add. BTW, I answered yes to this and so had that which was on the 6.2 install disc. Based on the other responses, it is looking like perhaps that is not the best method, and maybe I should have skipped that and then added the ports after the install using cvsup or such. This is certainly a good thing to know for the future, though as of right now I am dealing with the disc install method. No. You were right to choose yes. That just installs the ports tree skeleton. It does not install any actual ports. Then when you do a csup tag=. for the ports tree, then it updates that tree. But you would still have to update the ports from the tree that you have chosen to install. What exactly is the best method for the new install when it comes to ports? I should say yes to installing the ports tree, but then how should I go forward at that point? For instance, should I immediately run csup when booting into the new system before actually installing anything from ports? Will that speed things up in the end, or make for greater stability? That is what I do. Actually, I csup the OS because it may have updates on it that are needed - security fixes mostly and also ports and even doc right then before doing any other installing. Some people don't even install Xorg until doing the csup. I haven't been quite that hard core, but it isn't a bad idea. The ports tree from one version of the OS to the next is not particularly different. It is just instructions on how to get the source and build the port (including dependant ports). It gets a little out of date now and then as the list of files that need to be downloaded or build procedured change, so it need a csup update now and then. But what that csup does is update the skeleton, not the actual ports. That is a subsequent step. Cool, that makes sense. I suppose right now it is a matter of figuring out just getting used to how to handle the system and know that I am carrying out the correct steps, or at least the most reliable steps, in the most beneficial order. Yup. jerry Thanks, Patrick ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
