On August 17, 2005 11:06 am, Michel Talon wrote: > Matthew Dillon wrote: > > Illusion. Every time I have ever used portupgrade, the result > > has been a completely broken system. Every time.
> This is nice to know, i was under the impression i was so dumb as > being unable to use portupgrade (yes, my experience is not far from > yours) when so many people swear on the bible that they regularly > upgrade their machine with portupgrade without a single hiccup :-) As with all things in life, it depends on how you use it. :) If you avoid the -a option, only use -r and -R when you know exactly which parts will be upgraded and what order they will be upgraded in, and only do a couple apps at a time, then it works wonderfully. I used it regularly on my home servers, my work laptop, 15 firewalls, 12 proxy servers, 2 e-mail servers, and a couple of workstations (running FreeBSD 4.x, 5.x, and 6-CURRENT) from the time it hit the ports tree to now without ever hosing a system or an app upgrade (with the exception of the first time I tried to upgrade perl or KDE without reading UPDATING). And that includes perl, X, and KDE upgrades. I've since moved package building to a central build server and only use the -PP option to portupgrade on the remote systems, and it still works fine. I see a lot of posts on various forums and mailing lists where people have hosed their systems, and every single one of them starts out "I ran portupgrade -arR and now my system is hooped". And everytime I get people to re-do the upgrade without using -arR, things work for them. :) IMO, it would be nice if the -a, -r, and -R options were removed from portupgrade. :) But, then, nobody would have anything to complain about or to fix, since their systems would still be running correctly. :D -- Freddie Cash, CCNT CCLP Helpdesk / Network Support Tech. School District 73 (250) 377-HELP [377-4357] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
