Re: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 00:35:28 -0400 b. f. articulated: This is the tag that you would use on src collections to update your base system sources (usually in /usr/src) to 8-STABLE. You would use RELENG_8_2 for the 8.2-STABLE security branch, RELENG_8_2_RELEASE for 8.2-RELEASE, and so on. Reading through the archives, several years worth, it appears that this is one of the most frequently asked questions. Many users, both new (obviously) and some not so new get confused as to what is the proper tag to use for each branch; ie Stable Current, etc.Maybe there should be some way to make it easier to understand. For example: 8.2-RELEASE: original release of code sans any updates, etc. 8.2-STABLE: released version plus security updates 8.2-CURRENT: All updates, security otherwise to the original version ?-CURRENT: The absolute latest release of FreeBSD irregardless of what version it is. Anyway, it is just a suggestion. In any case I think it might be easier for some to comprehend. Anything that eliminates confusion is a plus. -- Jerry ✌ jerry+f...@seibercom.net Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or ignored. Do not CC this poster. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 00:35:28 -0400 b. f. articulated: This is the tag that you would use on src collections to update your base system sources (usually in /usr/src) to 8-STABLE. You would use RELENG_8_2 for the 8.2-STABLE security branch, RELENG_8_2_RELEASE for 8.2-RELEASE, and so on. Reading through the archives, several years worth, it appears that this is one of the most frequently asked questions. Many users, both new (obviously) and some not so new get confused as to what is the proper tag to use for each branch; ie Stable Current, etc.Maybe there should be some way to make it easier to understand. For example: 8.2-RELEASE: original release of code sans any updates, etc. 8.2-STABLE: released version plus security updates 8.2-CURRENT: All updates, security otherwise to the original version ?-CURRENT: The absolute latest release of FreeBSD irregardless of what version it is. Anyway, it is just a suggestion. In any case I think it might be easier for some to comprehend. Anything that eliminates confusion is a plus. I have 34 years experience as a Data Systems technician, system admin, developer, and tech writer, yet I till won't claim I know everything, so please don't flame me. Constructive, polite criticism is welcome. I began my career before Unix or MicroSucks even existed. It is a misnomer to attach a release number to current or stable. CURRENT is called HEAD in source code control vernacular. CURRENT's number is transient. It is often incorrectly referred to as 9. Please refrain from such usage. It is technically incorrect and confuses users who have no knowledge of source code control. Same goes for STABLE. In my opinion, the real confusion is in ascertaining what you SHOULD be using. If you want to run FreeBSD, KDE, gnome, etc., as a PRODUCTION machine, yo should NOT be using CURRENT or STABLE. You should be installing a RELEASE on a TEST machine, verify that ALL your user applications have no showstopper anomales, and DEPLOY the release AFTER testing has given you a great dela of confidence in the software. You should JUMP from a release to the next release, using the testing and deployment mentioned. You WILL get security updates if you track a release, such as 8.2. But again, don't just update your sources and deploy. TEST it on a test machine, before exposing your end users to it. This is referred to as PROFESSIONALISM. The ONLY people that should be tracking STABLE or CURRENT are the people who DON'T need their hand held for system administration. If you violate this protocol, you will be taking developers time away from development to TRAIN you in system admin. PLEASE don't. Hope this helps and if it offends you, please take the time to think about it before you flame me. ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On 10/07/2011 14:02, Jerry wrote: On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 00:35:28 -0400 b. f. articulated: This is the tag that you would use on src collections to update your base system sources (usually in /usr/src) to 8-STABLE. You would use RELENG_8_2 for the 8.2-STABLE security branch, RELENG_8_2_RELEASE for 8.2-RELEASE, and so on. Reading through the archives, several years worth, it appears that this is one of the most frequently asked questions. Many users, both new (obviously) and some not so new get confused as to what is the proper tag to use for each branch; ie Stable Current, etc.Maybe there should be some way to make it easier to understand. For example: I was one of them until I discovered that googling FreeBSD tags leads straight to http://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/cvs-tags.html Eg RELENG_8 The line of development for FreeBSD-8.X, also known as FreeBSD 8-STABLE RELENG_8_2 The release branch for FreeBSD-8.2, used only for security advisories and other critical fixes. ... RELENG_8_2_0_RELEASE FreeBSD 8.2 Release Chris 8.2-RELEASE: original release of code sans any updates, etc. 8.2-STABLE: released version plus security updates 8.2-CURRENT: All updates, security otherwise to the original version ?-CURRENT: The absolute latest release of FreeBSD irregardless of what version it is. Anyway, it is just a suggestion. In any case I think it might be easier for some to comprehend. Anything that eliminates confusion is a plus. ___ 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
Portupgrade Package Question
As root, I attempted to use portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz but failed - File unavailable (e.g. file not found, no access) I changed etc/pkgtools.conf OS_PKGBRANCH=8-STABLE and portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz failed with the same message. I can ftp either file. I get the same error with any out-of-date port. What am I doing wrong? tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On 7/9/2011 1:14 PM, Thomas D. Dean wrote: As root, I attempted to use portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz but failed - File unavailable (e.g. file not found, no access) I changed etc/pkgtools.conf OS_PKGBRANCH=8-STABLE and portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz failed with the same message. I can ftp either file. I get the same error with any out-of-date port. What am I doing wrong? Have you made sure you updated ports? 'portsnap fetch extract' should be sufficient. -- Chris Brennan -- A: Yes. Q: Are you sure? A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? http://xkcd.com/84/ | http://xkcd.com/149/ | http://xkcd.com/549/ GPG: D5B20C0C (6741 8EE4 6C7D 11FB 8DA8 9E4A EECD 9A84 D5B2 0C0C) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 14:15 -0400, Chris Brennan wrote: On 7/9/2011 1:14 PM, Thomas D. Dean wrote: As root, I attempted to use portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz but failed - File unavailable (e.g. file not found, no access) I changed etc/pkgtools.conf OS_PKGBRANCH=8-STABLE and portupgrade -PPRv m4 which attempted to access ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz failed with the same message. I can ftp either file. I get the same error with any out-of-date port. What am I doing wrong? Have you made sure you updated ports? 'portsnap fetch extract' should be sufficient. Sorry, I did not reply to the list. Yes, I did update ports. /usr/bin/fetch -v 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz' looking up ftp.FreeBSD.org connecting to ftp.FreeBSD.org:21 fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:33:00 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote: /usr/bin/fetch -v 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz' looking up ftp.FreeBSD.org connecting to ftp.FreeBSD.org:21 fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) It's quite simple if you investigate the content of the FTP server. :-) Doesn't work: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz Works: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz Just change packages-8-STABLE to packages-8-stable and try again. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 20:47 +0200, Polytropon wrote: On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:33:00 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote: /usr/bin/fetch -v 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz' looking up ftp.FreeBSD.org connecting to ftp.FreeBSD.org:21 fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) It's quite simple if you investigate the content of the FTP server. :-) Doesn't work: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-STABLE/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz Works: ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8-stable/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz Just change packages-8-STABLE to packages-8-stable and try again. Yes. My error. I did not completely remove 8.2-RELEASE when I edited pkgtools.conf the 2nd time. I introduced this error when I typed the fetch command. Sorry. My original problem still exists: portupgrade fails with any out-of-date package. I should have sent the console output the first time... I restored pkgtools.conf to the original version, from the initial installation. Here is the output of the portupgrade attempt: uname -a FreeBSD toshiba.tddhome 8.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 8.2-RELEASE #0: Fri Feb 18 02:24:46 UTC 2011 r...@almeida.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 portupgrade --version portupgrade 2.4.8 portupgrade -PPv m4 --- Session started at: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:55:55 -0700 --- Checking for the latest package of 'devel/m4' --- Found a package of 'devel/m4': /usr/ports/packages/All/m4-1.4.15,1.tbz (m4-1.4.15,1) --- Fetching the package(s) for 'm4-1.4.16,1' (devel/m4) --- Fetching m4-1.4.16,1 ++ Will try the following sites in the order named: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org//pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/ --- Invoking a command: /usr/bin/fetch -o '/var/tmp/portupgrademXjhTdVX/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz' 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz' fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) ** The command returned a non-zero exit status: 1 ** Failed to fetch ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tbz --- Invoking a command: /usr/bin/fetch -o '/var/tmp/portupgrademXjhTdVX/m4-1.4.16,1.txz' 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.txz' fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.txz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) ** The command returned a non-zero exit status: 1 ** Failed to fetch ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.txz --- Invoking a command: /usr/bin/fetch -o '/var/tmp/portupgrademXjhTdVX/m4-1.4.16,1.tgz' 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tgz' fetch: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tgz: File unavailable (e.g., file not found, no access) ** The command returned a non-zero exit status: 1 ** Failed to fetch ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/All/m4-1.4.16,1.tgz ** Failed to fetch m4-1.4.16,1 --- Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) ! m4-1.4.16,1 (fetch error) --- Packages processed: 0 done, 0 ignored, 0 skipped and 1 failed --- Fetching the latest package(s) for 'm4' (devel/m4) --- Fetching m4 ++ Will try the following sites in the order named: ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org//pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/ --- Invoking a command: /usr/bin/fetch -o '/var/tmp/portupgradeyQuqTSRB/m4.tbz' 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/i386/packages-8.2-release/Latest/m4.tbz' /var/tmp/portupgradeyQuqTSRB/m4.tbz 100% of 185 kB 144 kBps --- Downloaded as m4.tbz --- Identifying the package /var/tmp/portupgradeyQuqTSRB/m4.tbz --- Saved as /usr/ports/packages/All/m4-1.4.15,1.tbz --- Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) + m4@ --- Packages processed: 1 done, 0 ignored, 0 skipped and 0 failed --- Found a package of 'devel/m4': /usr/ports/packages/All/m4-1.4.15,1.tbz (m4-1.4.15,1) --- Located a package version 1.4.15,1 (/usr/ports/packages/All/m4-1.4.15,1.tbz) --- ** Upgrade tasks 1: 0 done, 0 ignored, 0 skipped and 1 failed --- Listing the results (+:done / -:ignored / *:skipped / !:failed) ! devel/m4 (m4-1.4.15,1)(package not found) --- Packages processed: 0 done, 0 ignored, 0 skipped and 1 failed --- Session ended at: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:56:29 -0700 (consumed 00:00:33) tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 12:05 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote: Sorry to answer my own post. The packages that are out-of-date on the system I was updating are in relationship to 8.2-release. A couple days ago, I cvsup'd the port tree with *default release-cvs tag=. ports-all Today, portsnap fetch extract ... portsnap fetch update ... portupgrade -PPRva Does the portsnap update the port tree relative to 8.2-release or 8-stable? Or, did cvsup get ports from 8-stable? Looks like 8-stable. 8-stablem4-1.4.16,1.tbz 8.2-release m4-1.4.15,1.tbz Anyway, I can get there from here Thanks. tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 09 Jul 2011 12:32:12 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 12:05 -0700, Thomas D. Dean wrote: Sorry to answer my own post. The packages that are out-of-date on the system I was updating are in relationship to 8.2-release. A couple days ago, I cvsup'd the port tree with *default release-cvs tag=. ports-all Today, portsnap fetch extract ... portsnap fetch update ... portupgrade -PPRva Does the portsnap update the port tree relative to 8.2-release or 8-stable? Or, did cvsup get ports from 8-stable? Looks like 8-stable. 8-stablem4-1.4.16,1.tbz 8.2-release m4-1.4.15,1.tbz Anyway, I can get there from here If I understood everything correctly, CVS (csup) and portsnap do both follow the one tree which gets frequently updated, and by the tag specified above you'll always get the current version of the tree. Getting older versions (e. g. the RELEASE tree) involves specifying a different tag, or loading it from the installation media directly. The difference is that changes in the ports tree are reflected much faster in the CVS method than in the portsnap approach, which may lag a bit. However, portsnap seems to work faster and to perform better than CVS. It's also worth mentioning that it seems to fit better to the building cycle of the -stable ports to become precompiled packages (that you request using the -PP parameter, similar to the use of pkg_add -r in case of installation instead of update). But if you require the most recent ports tree, using CVS seems to be the better method. As you're updating binary, but with using the ports tree (portupgrade relies on that, pkg_add for example doesn't), you should make sure to always have the current version if you follow the stable OS branch. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 21:45 +0200, Polytropon wrote: If I understood everything correctly, CVS (csup) and portsnap do both follow the one tree which gets frequently updated, and by the tag specified above you'll always get the current version of the tree. Getting older versions (e. g. the RELEASE tree) involves specifying a different tag, or loading it from the installation media directly. The difference is that changes in the ports tree are reflected much faster in the CVS method than in the portsnap approach, which may lag a bit. However, portsnap seems to work faster and to perform better than CVS. It's also worth mentioning that it seems to fit better to the building cycle of the -stable ports to become precompiled packages (that you request using the -PP parameter, similar to the use of pkg_add -r in case of installation instead of update). But if you require the most recent ports tree, using CVS seems to be the better method. As you're updating binary, but with using the ports tree (portupgrade relies on that, pkg_add for example doesn't), you should make sure to always have the current version if you follow the stable OS branch. I have always built ports from the source. I decided to try binary ports for things I have not modified. I cannot seem to get portupgrade to use the definitions I set in etc/pkgtools.conf. For the most recent try, I have ... # OS_PATCHLEVEL:-p8 # OS_PLATFORM:i386 amd64 # OS_PKGBRANCH: 7-current 6.1-release OS_RELEASE=8-STABLE OS_BRANCH=STABLE OS_PKGBRANCH=8-stable # Useful predefined functions: # # localbase() #Returns LOCALBASE. ... But, portupgrade still tries to fetch from 8.2-release. If I want to use binary ports it looks like I need to zap the ports tree and recreate it with portsnap. tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
Thomas D. Dean wrote:
...
For the most recent try, I have
...
# OS_PATCHLEVEL:-p8
# OS_PLATFORM:i386 amd64
# OS_PKGBRANCH: 7-current 6.1-release
OS_RELEASE=8-STABLE
OS_BRANCH=STABLE
OS_PKGBRANCH=8-stable
The comments above were not intended as an invitation to try to define
these constants here, but merely describe typical values that the
constants may have. The constants are computed from parsing your
'uname -rm' output in $LOCALBASE/$RUBY_SITELIBDIR/pkgtools.rb (usually
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/pkgtools.rb), so you cannot set them
in pkgtools.conf. They were only mentioned so that users would know
that they were available for defining other procedures and variables
(for an example, see below).
# Useful predefined functions:
#
# localbase()
#Returns LOCALBASE.
...
But, portupgrade still tries to fetch from 8.2-release.
If you are running 8.2-RELEASE, and yet wish to obtain 8-stable
packages (which are actually built on recent versions of 8.1-STABLE,
with recent versions of the ports tree), then set PKG_SITES
appropriately in pkgtools.conf. In this case, I think (untested) that
you could substitute
sprintf('%s/pub/FreeBSD/ports/%s/packages-%s-stable/',
ENV['PACKAGEROOT'] || 'ftp://ftp.FreeBSD.org', OS_PLATFORM, OS_MAJOR)
for the default
pkg_site_mirror(root)
in PKG_SITES. (It might be better to upgrade your base system to
8-STABLE, in which case the defaults will be correct without any need
for these changes, and other problems will also be fixed).
If I want to use binary ports it looks like I need to zap the ports tree
and recreate it with portsnap.
This should not be necessary. You should be able to use any method to
update the tree (anonymous cvs, csup/cvsup, portsnap, http/ftp, rsync,
ctm, etc.). Of course, if your tree and index file do not correspond
to the version of the binary packages that you want to use, you will
occasionally trip over problems that will require intervention. (Note
that in the section of the csup file that you reproduced in an earlier
message, 'release-cvs' should be 'release=cvs'.)
PKG_SITES will only be used by the ports-mgmt/portupgrade scripts; if
you want to use pkg_add(1) manually, and obtain the 8-stable packages,
then you should define PACKAGESITE in your environment, or provide a
full URL. The ports-mgmt/portupgrade scripts also respect
PACKAGESITE, which will override PACKAGEROOT and PKG_SITES in those
scripts.
b.
___
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: Portupgrade Package Question
On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 19:54 -0400, b. f. wrote: occasionally trip over problems that will require intervention. (Note that in the section of the csup file that you reproduced in an earlier message, 'release-cvs' should be 'release=cvs'.) The '-' was a typo on my part. The machine I used for email is not the machine I am updating. I am updating that machine, now. The supfile contains *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8 This should track 8-stable. Correct? After the build finishes, portupgrade should fetch from 8-stable. A slow, remote machine... tomdean ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On 7/9/11, Thomas D. Dean tomd...@speakeasy.org wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 19:54 -0400, b. f. wrote: occasionally trip over problems that will require intervention. (Note that in the section of the csup file that you reproduced in an earlier message, 'release-cvs' should be 'release=cvs'.) The '-' was a typo on my part. The machine I used for email is not the machine I am updating. I am updating that machine, now. The supfile contains *default release=cvs tag=RELENG_8 This should track 8-stable. Correct? This is the tag that you would use on src collections to update your base system sources (usually in /usr/src) to 8-STABLE. You would use RELENG_8_2 for the 8.2-STABLE security branch, RELENG_8_2_RELEASE for 8.2-RELEASE, and so on. But src tags are not the same as ports tags. That is why they have separate example supfiles for the base system sources, and for ports. And that is also why they have the prominent warning in the base system example supfiles: ### # # DANGER! WARNING! LOOK OUT! VORSICHT! # # If you add any of the ports or doc collections to this file, be sure to # specify them with a tag value set to ., like this: # # ports-all tag=. # doc-all tag=. # # If you leave out the tag=. portion, CVSup will delete all of # the files in your ports or doc tree. That is because the ports and doc # collections do not use the same tags as the main part of the FreeBSD # source tree. # ### As far as I know, the ports collection has no tags for any stable branches, only tags made at the time of releases. So for ports, if you are running 8.2-RELEASE, you have three choices: (1) use RELEASE_8_2_0 if you want to stick with a snapshot of the ports tree taken at the time of the release, or (2) use . if you want up-to-date ports, or (3) choose a specific snapshot of ports via date= instead of tag= (for details, see, for example, the csup(1) manpage.) After the build finishes, portupgrade should fetch from 8-stable. I'm not sure what you mean here. As I wrote before, you need to make some additional changes to ensure that portupgrade uses 8-stable packages if you have an 8.2-RELEASE base system. Just having a up-to-date ports tree and index isn't sufficient. However, if you replace your 8.2-RELEASE base system with a newer 8.2-STABLE or 8-STABLE base system, then portupgrade should fetch the 8-stable packages by default, without any additional changes. You could cheat, and neither upgrade your base system nor make the changes I mentioned in my last message, but instead fool portupgrade into thinking that you have a newer base system, by setting UNAME_R to something like 8.2-STABLE in your environment when you call portupgrade, but you are bound to run into problems eventually by lying in that way. b. ___ 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: Portupgrade Package Question
On 7/10/11, b. f. bf1...@googlemail.com wrote: On 7/9/11, Thomas D. Dean tomd...@speakeasy.org wrote: On Sat, 2011-07-09 at 19:54 -0400, b. f. wrote: You could cheat, and neither upgrade your base system nor make the changes I mentioned in my last message, but instead fool portupgrade into thinking that you have a newer base system, by setting UNAME_R to Sorry, that should be UNAME_r, with a lower-case r, above. But, as I wrote, using that workaround is probably not a good idea. something like 8.2-STABLE in your environment when you call portupgrade, but you are bound to run into problems eventually by lying in that way. ___ 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
