On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 5:17 PM, James Hozier <guitars...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- On Tue, 12/20/11, James Hartley <jjhart...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > From: James Hartley <jjhart...@gmail.com> > > Subject: Re: Proper way to update system + ports? > > To: "James Hozier" <guitars...@yahoo.com> > > Cc: misc@openbsd.org > > Date: Tuesday, December 20, 2011, 12:36 AM > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:19 PM, > > James Hozier <guitars...@yahoo.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 12/19/11, Jeremie > > Courreges-Anglas > > > > <jca+m...@wxcvbn.org> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > So -current Ports are not compatible with > > -stable > > > > Ports, right? > > > > > Or am I wrong in presuming this? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Per FAQ 15.4.1: > > > > > > > > Do NOT check out a -current ports tree and expect > > it to > > > > work on a -release > > > > or -stable system. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do I know if I have checked out the -current ports > > tree or > > > the -stable ports tree? > > > > > > > Study FAQ 5.3.3. If no tagname was explicitly > > provided in the CSV command > > used, then the head of the CVS tree (in this case -current) > > was downloaded. > > > > > > So in my case, the command I used: > # cvs -d$CVSROOT checkout -rOPENBSD_5_0 -P src ports > > included the -rOPENBSD_5_0 tag (-r) which indicates the -stable tree, > right? And it applied to both src and ports so that I checked out > the -stable version of both src and ports? > Correct. However, you can't seem to fully account for the status of the downloaded tree. So as Ingo, I would treat whatever you currently have on your system as suspect. Personally, I would recommend getting the tree again as you could be in the weeds wasting a lot of time. Likewise, if you study the check-in history for Firefox: http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/ports/www/mozilla-firefox/Makefile You will see that the OPENBSD_5_0 tag at revision 1.187. Firefox 6.0 wasn't checked into the ports tree until 1.188. This means that for Firefox 5 is the only version available to OpenBSD 5.0-release & -stable. If you want a newer version, you will have to run -current. > Also, would it be a bad idea to use both Ports and Packages? You don't seem to understand how the packages/ports system works. The output of compiling ports is packages -- the very same packages which can be found on the mirrors. So there is nothing to be gained by compiling ports for -release or -stable unless there have been security fixes or other changes checked into the ports tree. The above link show both OPENBSD_5_0 & OPENBSD_5_0_BASE tags on revision 1.187 of the Makefile used to build the Firefox port so nothing has changed for 5.0-release or -stable since 5.0 was released. All changes to Firefox, versions 6.0, 7.0, & 8.0, have taken place in -current only.
