Re: Proper way to update ports with svn
Andre Goree wrote: > On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:52:41 -0400, Damien Fleuriot wrote: > >> On 29 March 2013 22:29, Andre Goree wrote: >> >>> I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up >>> >>> >>> /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using >>> >>> 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would >>> >>> seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make >>> >>> fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, >>> >>> but it doesn't appear to be here: >>> >>> https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks in advance for any advice. >> >> 'make index' looks good to me, it's the right way to do things imo. >> >> What bothers you, following 'make index', pkg version output seems dodgy >> ? >> >> > > Mainly, just the amount of time it takes to run "make index", lol. And > the fact that I never had to do so with portsnap. I'm thinking that > perhaps portsnap runs something similar to 'make fetchindex' within the > whole 'portsnap fetch update' process...? > In case you find this of interest, FWIW I changed from the old csup to using portsnap. I also still use portupgrade. This is the command I do to check for ports in need of update: # portsnap fetch update && portsdb -u && pkgdb -F && portversion The portsnap fetch update portion outputs "Building new INDEX files... done." at the end of its run. Notice the three subsequent commands are from the portupgrade package. Portsnap will alter or change the INDEX-7, INDEX-8, and INDEX-9 files. As pointed out elsewhere portupgrade manages its own index database file separately and in parallel, which is the INDEX-9.db file. At first glance it would seem that running portsdb and pkgdb might appear to be semi-superfluos, but doing so will check the package database and ensure it is exactly in sync with the ports INDEX-* files. I would rather pkgdb dump out an error if something is wrong, and it will if there is something not quite right in the package database. As long as everything is good it just sails on through and portversion tells me which ports are in need of upgrade. Then I read the new UPDATING file prior to doing portupgrade -a, following any instructions which may pertain. I have been doing this for 3-4 months now and it has served me well. I was doing something very similar back in the csup days, but I had to work out some small changes to the above command line using trial and error. The above result is very fast, as compared to just trying to use the same old identical CLI switches from csup days. To start from a clean slate I wiped /usr/ports and followed the Handbook commands of portsnap fetch followed by the portsnap extract commands. Once I had a new pristine ports tree I update it and check for new ports with the above command. It has worked well. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proper way to update ports with svn
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:52:41 -0400, Damien Fleuriot wrote: On 29 March 2013 22:29, Andre Goree wrote: I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, but it doesn't appear to be here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer Thanks in advance for any advice. 'make index' looks good to me, it's the right way to do things imo. What bothers you, following 'make index', pkg version output seems dodgy ? Mainly, just the amount of time it takes to run "make index", lol. And the fact that I never had to do so with portsnap. I'm thinking that perhaps portsnap runs something similar to 'make fetchindex' within the whole 'portsnap fetch update' process...? -- Andre Goree an...@drenet.info ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proper way to update ports with svn
On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:56:12 -0400, Lowell Gilbert wrote: Andre Goree writes: I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, but it doesn't appear to be here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer Subversion is not relevant; it has not changed the use of the index file. 'portversion' is part of the portupgrade port, and requires not just an index but its own database version of the index file. Building your own index will be slightly more accurate for what is actually on your box, but fetching it will be much faster and nearly always accurate enough. Thanks for the insight! -- Andre Goree an...@drenet.info ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proper way to update ports with svn
Andre Goree writes: > I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up > /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using > 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would > seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make > fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, > but it doesn't appear to be here: > https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer Subversion is not relevant; it has not changed the use of the index file. 'portversion' is part of the portupgrade port, and requires not just an index but its own database version of the index file. Building your own index will be slightly more accurate for what is actually on your box, but fetching it will be much faster and nearly always accurate enough. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proper way to update ports with svn
On 29 March 2013 22:29, Andre Goree wrote: > I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up > /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using > 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would > seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make > fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, > but it doesn't appear to be here: > https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer > > Thanks in advance for any advice. > 'make index' looks good to me, it's the right way to do things imo. What bothers you, following 'make index', pkg version output seems dodgy ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Proper way to update ports with svn
I seem to have to run 'make index' in /usr/ports after I've run 'svn up /usr/ports' in order to see which ports need to be updated using 'portversion'. This doesn't seem correct...and if so portsnap would seem like a much better tool. Perhaps I should be running 'make fetchindex' instead? I'm sure I've read about the correct way to do so, but it doesn't appear to be here: https://wiki.freebsd.org/PortsSubversionPrimer Thanks in advance for any advice. -- Andre Goree an...@drenet.info ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
