Rebuilding everything
As a newbye with freebsd 5.3 on a pentium 3 and many source packages compiled installed from the ports, I've just learnt that I could tailor my box modifying make.conf. I'm focusing now on the fact that I could add a CPUTYPE=p3 in that file to make the all box faster due to a more refined compilation. BUT... How could I re-compile and re-install everything to take into account the new directives in make.conf? Ciao Vittorio ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rebuilding everything
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Vittorio wrote: As a newbye with freebsd 5.3 on a pentium 3 and many source packages compiled installed from the ports, I've just learnt that I could tailor my box modifying make.conf. I'm focusing now on the fact that I could add a CPUTYPE=p3 in that file to make the all box faster due to a more refined compilation. BUT... How could I re-compile and re-install everything to take into account the new directives in make.conf? Ciao Vittorio You can use portupgrade -vaf -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32) iD8DBQFCTC1fLWSOuibjjvIRAtC6AKCNP6KYLj/Z0JWxWVWiWrRjY6hy9gCfTFBy kwm1+oNeBj9Uur9G7T6om7s= =76jN -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rebuilding everything
Darksidex wrote: How could I re-compile and re-install everything to take into account the new directives in make.conf? Ciao Vittorio You can use portupgrade -vaf Though that would only affect ports/packages you've installed, and not the rest of your system. I regularly cvsup /usr/ports and /usr/src and use portupgrade -arR to upgrade my ports and make buildworld make buildkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC make installkernel KERNCONF=GENERIC make installworld to update the rest of my system. I still consider myself very new to most of this, though, so I'm not certain, but I think the system should be able to determine your CPUTYPE automatically, without needing it hardcoded in make.conf. I think you should only need to use this directive if for some reason it's improperly detecting your cpu type. Hopefully someone can confirm or disprove that for you, though. Tom ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Rebuilding everything
it was said: Darksidex wrote: How could I re-compile and re-install everything to take into account the new directives in make.conf? Ciao Vittorio You can use portupgrade -vaf snip I still consider myself very new to most of this, though, so I'm not certain, but I think the system should be able to determine your CPUTYPE automatically, without needing it hardcoded in make.conf. I think you should only need to use this directive if for some reason it's improperly detecting your cpu type. snip Hello, Using CPUTYPE= in make.conf causes the complier to optimize for the specific CPU. Otherwise, it does a generic compile that would run on any CPU. The two easiest ways to improve system performance are to build a custom kernel that has all the uneeded options and devices removed and to tweak make.conf. Before doing either, read man tuning and man make.conf. Also, to find out what all the stuff in the kernel conf does, see /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/NOTES (assuming you're running 5.x on an Intel or Intel-compatible platform. hth, stheg __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
Well, as a footnote, I went right ahead and patched the machine, then did make buildworld, installworld, make kernel, install kernel. . . . . and so far, everything is a-okay. :D On Sun, 2004-03-21 at 03:17, Dan Nelson wrote: In the last episode (Mar 21), Mark said: Pardon my daftness, but how is a 'file' against, say, httpd, like this, file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped going to tell me whether httpd was dynamically linked against OpenSSL, or statically? It just tells me httpd uses shared libraries. Or does it mean it ONLY uses shared libraries? You can also use the ldd command to list the specific shlibs linked by a program, but you can usually assume that if it's dynamically linked, it has dynamically linked all its libraries too. Theoretically, a program could have linked directly to /usr/lib/libssl.a, but most of the time they just use -lssl, which will prefer shared libraries over static. -- - Rilindo Foster http://monzell.com AIM: rilindo ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
In the last episode (Mar 21), Mark said: Pardon my daftness, but how is a 'file' against, say, httpd, like this, file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped going to tell me whether httpd was dynamically linked against OpenSSL, or statically? It just tells me httpd uses shared libraries. Or does it mean it ONLY uses shared libraries? You can also use the ldd command to list the specific shlibs linked by a program, but you can usually assume that if it's dynamically linked, it has dynamically linked all its libraries too. Theoretically, a program could have linked directly to /usr/lib/libssl.a, but most of the time they just use -lssl, which will prefer shared libraries over static. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
- Original Message - From: Kent Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 8:52 AM Subject: Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything* Pardon my daftness, but how is a 'file' against, say, httpd, like this, file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped going to tell me whether httpd was dynamically linked against OpenSSL, or statically? It just tells me httpd uses shared libraries. Or does it mean it ONLY uses shared libraries? I use a script that I call pkgreq (pkg-required). It is # cat pkgreq #! /bin/sh cd /var/db/pkg pkg_info -R $1* | more Thanks. I used this info, and the ldd command. I pretty much rebuilt everything anyway. :) I am setting up a new FreeBSD 4.9R-p3 server; and I figure now is still the time to do major changes. What about tcp_wrappers, though? I rebuild stunnel (inet-version), and it still says, stunnel 3.26 on i386-unknown-freebsd4.9 PTHREAD+LIBWRAP with OpenSSL 0.9.7c 30 Sep 2003 Odd; because the stand-alone stunnel, via the ports, seems ok: stunnel 4.04 on i386-portbld-freebsd4.9 PTHREAD+LIBWRAP with OpenSSL 0.9.7d 17 Mar 2004 Besides, tcp_wrappers does not seem to be in the ports anyway (which makes sense, as it is part of the base-system). Still, do I need a new tcp_wrappers? And if so, where do I find it? Thanks, - Mark ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
On Sun, 21 Mar 2004, Mark wrote: file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped you could use ldd /usr/local/sbin/httpd to find out what it was dynamically linked against. Regards, /\_/\ All dogs go to heaven. [EMAIL PROTECTED](0 0)http://www.alphaque.com/ +==oOO--(_)--OOo==+ | for a in past present future; do| | for b in clients employers associates relatives neighbours pets; do | | echo The opinions here in no way reflect the opinions of my $a $b. | | done; done | +=+ ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
Okay, so there is this openssl vulnerability out there and I need to patch the OS and then do the makeworld/buildworld. Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; -- - Rilindo Foster http://monzell.com AIM: rilindo ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
In the last episode (Mar 20), Rilindo Foster said: Okay, so there is this openssl vulnerability out there and I need to patch the OS and then do the makeworld/buildworld. Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; You only need to rebuild the ports that use the openssl libs and link statically. My guess is that would be zero. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
- Original Message - From: Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rilindo Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 5:01 AM Subject: Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything* Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; You only need to rebuild the ports that use the openssl libs and link statically. My guess is that would be zero. What do you mean? I built OpenSSL into everything; sendmail, Apache, qpopper, stunnel, php4, mod_perl, etc. Close to the 300 of the original poster. :) And like him, I really feel rather upset if I'd have to do it all over again. Or are all of the above dynamically linked? Thanks, - Mark ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
In the last episode (Mar 21), Mark said: - Original Message - From: Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rilindo Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 5:01 AM Subject: Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything* Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; You only need to rebuild the ports that use the openssl libs and link statically. My guess is that would be zero. What do you mean? I built OpenSSL into everything; sendmail, Apache, qpopper, stunnel, php4, mod_perl, etc. Close to the 300 of the original poster. :) And like him, I really feel rather upset if I'd have to do it all over again. Or are all of the above dynamically linked? The file command will indicate whether a program was linked static or dynamic. -- Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
- Original Message - From: Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 7:55 AM Subject: Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything* Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; You only need to rebuild the ports that use the openssl libs and link statically. My guess is that would be zero. What do you mean? I built OpenSSL into everything; sendmail, Apache, qpopper, stunnel, php4, mod_perl, etc. Close to the 300 of the original poster. :) And like him, I really feel rather upset if I'd have to do it all over again. Or are all of the above dynamically linked? The file command will indicate whether a program was linked static or dynamic. Pardon my daftness, but how is a 'file' against, say, httpd, like this, file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped going to tell me whether httpd was dynamically linked against OpenSSL, or statically? It just tells me httpd uses shared libraries. Or does it mean it ONLY uses shared libraries? Thanks, - Mark ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything*
On Saturday 20 March 2004 11:08 pm, Mark wrote: - Original Message - From: Dan Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mark [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 7:55 AM Subject: Re: Do I really need to rebuilding *everything* Question is, can I get away with rebuilding my entire ports collection? With about 300 apps complied, I really don't want to do it. ;_; You only need to rebuild the ports that use the openssl libs and link statically. My guess is that would be zero. What do you mean? I built OpenSSL into everything; sendmail, Apache, qpopper, stunnel, php4, mod_perl, etc. Close to the 300 of the original poster. :) And like him, I really feel rather upset if I'd have to do it all over again. Or are all of the above dynamically linked? The file command will indicate whether a program was linked static or dynamic. Pardon my daftness, but how is a 'file' against, say, httpd, like this, file /usr/local/sbin/httpd /usr/local/sbin/httpd: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped going to tell me whether httpd was dynamically linked against OpenSSL, or statically? It just tells me httpd uses shared libraries. Or does it mean it ONLY uses shared libraries? I use a script that I call pkgreq (pkg-required). It is # cat pkgreq #! /bin/sh cd /var/db/pkg pkg_info -R $1* | more The only thing it shows openssl being used for me is Apache-2.0.49. That is a no-brainer since Apache was updated to .49 after I updated openssl. One thing to remember is that if a header file had been changed, which wasn't the case here, even dynamic library usage may have required a rebuild to be safe. If they had to change the typing of a variable used by a module, any program that used that module with the incorrect typing could have been passing or receiving bad data. Off by one or more errors occur when a structure is modified and using programs aren't rebuilt. Kent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
