Posted by
timothy
on from the better-stuff-dammit dept.
LiquidPC writes: "OSNews is running an article describing CVSup, mounting, ports, and the FreeBSD init system; focused primarily towards new users to FreeBSD."
Re:FreeBSD Configuration
by
taion
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Regarding portupgrade, there's no need to run it from/var/db/pkg, and it's suggested that you simply run portupgrade -ra to update everything.
This recompiles and reinstalls all ports for which the installed version is lower than that in the ports library.
You can also specify to portupgrade that it should only use packages, as well as various other options (man portupgrade for a more detailed account).
It's recommended, however, that you install and upgrade ports from source. With a properly configured/etc/make.conf, the code will be optimized specifically for your system and thus run faster, and the ports from CVS tend to be more up-to-date than corresponding packages.
--
----------
Floccinaucinihilipilification - the action or habit of judging something to be worthless
Since the FreeBSD project does not maintain the CVS trees of the ports (if they are even in CVS), this would be a little hard.
What the project does do is maintain the FreeBSD specific diffs so you can just use the original source instead of a custom FreeBSD one.
For selected programs (ie the ones in the contrib tree) the project does keep the tree so you can just get the diffs.
BWP
Re:FreeBSD Configuration
by
taion
·
· Score: 5, Informative
pkg_add -r <port name> will install the latest version of the package of the specified port, if one is available.
In addition, portupgrade only recompiles packages that have a version change, and the ports in the ports library compile off of released versions of the source (i.e. version x.y,z_w), not from the CVS repositories --- if the only difference between a new release of some hideously large port (X or Mozilla, for instance; GNOME is actually a meta-port, or a collection of ports, none of which take particularly long to build, really) and the older release is a comment change, well... blame the developers, not the porters (:
In addition, especially for larger ports, most minor changes to the port (such as changing the locations of distribution files and whatnot) do not affect the PORTREVISION, so they will not be recompiled either.
--
----------
Floccinaucinihilipilification - the action or habit of judging something to be worthless
Slashdot Mirror
Regarding portupgrade, there's no need to run it from /var/db/pkg, and it's suggested that you simply run portupgrade -ra to update everything.
/etc/make.conf, the code will be optimized specifically for your system and thus run faster, and the ports from CVS tend to be more up-to-date than corresponding packages.
This recompiles and reinstalls all ports for which the installed version is lower than that in the ports library.
You can also specify to portupgrade that it should only use packages, as well as various other options (man portupgrade for a more detailed account).
It's recommended, however, that you install and upgrade ports from source. With a properly configured
----------
Floccinaucinihilipilification - the action or habit of judging something to be worthless
Since the FreeBSD project does not maintain the CVS trees of the ports (if they are even in CVS), this would be a little hard.
What the project does do is maintain the FreeBSD specific diffs so you can just use the original source instead of a custom FreeBSD one.
For selected programs (ie the ones in the contrib tree) the project does keep the tree so you can just get the diffs.
BWP
pkg_add -r <port name> will install the latest version of the package of the specified port, if one is available.
In addition, portupgrade only recompiles packages that have a version change, and the ports in the ports library compile off of released versions of the source (i.e. version x.y,z_w), not from the CVS repositories --- if the only difference between a new release of some hideously large port (X or Mozilla, for instance; GNOME is actually a meta-port, or a collection of ports, none of which take particularly long to build, really) and the older release is a comment change, well... blame the developers, not the porters (:
In addition, especially for larger ports, most minor changes to the port (such as changing the locations of distribution files and whatnot) do not affect the PORTREVISION, so they will not be recompiled either.
----------
Floccinaucinihilipilification - the action or habit of judging something to be worthless