packages with portupgrade update on release
in [FreeBSD]
|
Prev: NYC LOCAL: Wednesday 2 June 2010 NYCBUG: Nikolai Fetissov on the Use of GDB for Systems Administration
Next: freebsd support for aws ec2
From: Louis Epstein on 4 Jun 2010 20:24 Chronos <me3(a)privacy.net> wrote: : Michel Talon wrote: : :> Indi <indi(a)satcidananda.16x108.merseine.nu> wrote: :>> You should try runing pkdb -fF, update your ports tree and try :>> portupgrade -avf :>> :>> But you might have to deinstall libpng (and possibly libjpg) and :>> everything that depends on it then build it fresh. :>> :> :> Fantastic! I had always beleived that the FreeBSD ports system was :> foolproof and only idiots like me had problems with it. Another :> newby coming to grips with reality... : : portupgrade != the ports system. portupgrade has foibles of its own. What about portsnap? -=-=- The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again, at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
From: Michel Talon on 5 Jun 2010 16:44
Chronos <me3(a)privacy.net> wrote: > You are criticising a fundamental part of what allows FreeBSD to exist > at all from the position of a self-confessed non-user. That, above all > else, is what is causing the arguments. And this is not exact. I have 2 desktops at work running FreeBSD. I have confessed using Ubuntu on my *laptop* for another reason, the hardware support of this laptop is abysmal. So i have continually used FreeBSD on desktops since FreeBSD-2.2.5, which is very strange for a "non-user". > > I thought Joe User and Jane Hacker were to our scenario what Foo and > Bar are to examples? I am unaware of any "Jane Hacker" or "Joe User" > having made comment. Let me say that Jane Hacker is some character appearing in this discussion. I have no intention being rude with participants in the newsgroup, even when some are very rude with me. I have no intention however to conced i am wrong when i am convinced i am right. > > [1] What would be nice to see in PC-BSD one day is something akin to > apt-cacher where PBIs and updates are only downloaded once from a > "master" desktop and then shared between others locally. PC-BSD is a *different* solution to the same problem, a solution based on so-called "fat packages" that is packages coming with all their dependencies. This has advantages and inconvenients compared to the straight solution (i mean a Debian-like solution). Personnally i am not able to ponder what is the best choice. But being an Ubuntu user (on my laptop), i have observed that the Debian-like solution is pretty good. The "fat packages" solution is basically the one used by Windows people when they are using Firefox or Openoffice. It is not bad either. I suspect it would not be very nice whan confronted with hundreds of such fat packages, but i will restrein emitting an opinion. What i know for sure is that some FreeBSD developers are contemplating introducing fat packages in the official project, but maybe this will not concretize. -- Michel TALON |