Hello -stable ones, I recently (without drama) upgraded a 5.4-RELEASE system to FreeBSD 5.5-STABLE #1: Tue Aug 1 11:11:20 EST 2006 for 'target practice' at least, on the way to 6.1-STABLE I was preparing to portupgrade everything next, when I wondered: a) should I upgrade from RELENG_5 straight to RELENG_6 or should I be stopping off at 6.1-RELEASE along the way first? and b) do I need to upgrade all existing ports (way out of date) before the source upgrade, or can I be confident of doing that from 6.1 (-R or -S)? FWIW: a wee Celeron 300, so minimising upgrade build times is desirable. Cheers, Ian
On Aug 21, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Ian Smith wrote:> a) should I upgrade from RELENG_5 straight to RELENG_6 or should I be > stopping off at 6.1-RELEASE along the way first? and >I'd go with 6.1-REL just to make sure you have a known working release, not that *you* broke something. With RELENG_6 you could luck into a broken system as shipped.> b) do I need to upgrade all existing ports (way out of date) before > the > source upgrade, or can I be confident of doing that from 6.1 (-R or > -S)?You really want to rebuild all your ports across major version changes. If not, over time as you rebuild certain libraries they will be pulling in multiple versions of other shared libs which may be linked to other versions of base system libs and could conflict with each other. Another advantage to rebuilding all the ports is you can clean out all your old 5.x system libraries once done.
Am 21.08.2006 um 18:19 schrieb Ian Smith:> Hello -stable ones, > > I recently (without drama) upgraded a 5.4-RELEASE system to > FreeBSD 5.5-STABLE #1: Tue Aug 1 11:11:20 EST 2006 > for 'target practice' at least, on the way to 6.1-STABLE > > I was preparing to portupgrade everything next, when I wondered: > > a) should I upgrade from RELENG_5 straight to RELENG_6 or should I be > stopping off at 6.1-RELEASE along the way first? andI'd go straight to 6-stable. Make sure you have a good backup, even if you stop over at 6.1.> b) do I need to upgrade all existing ports (way out of date) before > the > source upgrade, or can I be confident of doing that from 6.1 (-R or > -S)? > > FWIW: a wee Celeron 300, so minimising upgrade build times is > desirable.Unless you have business critical apps running (downtime must be minimal), you can wait until you've completed the upgrade to 6- stable, and then run portupgrade -af. If you'd like to run the portupgrade overnight, you might want to define BATCH, and possibly set any port building options in /usr/local/etc/pkgtools.conf, otherwise, the port builds will be frequently interrupted by make config questions. Stefan -- Stefan Bethke <stb@lassitu.de> Fon +49 170 346 0140
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:> On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:07:45PM +0300, Todorov @ Paladin wrote: >> Also - why portupgrade is not always aware of >> previously chosen options for a port build? >> > It depends. If options are OPTIONS (in the ports sense), they > are saved and independent of portupgrade. If options are > makefile options specified in pkgtools.conf, they are only > taken into accont if the port is (re)build explicitly; they > are not taken into account if a port is (re)built as a > dependency of another port. In plain text: if port B has > options in pkgtools.conf, and port A has B as its dependency, > and you portinstall/portupgrade A, B will be built (if needs > be) without pkgtools.conf options. Be careful.sysutils/portconf does not have that limitation. If you specify flags using that method, they will always be used. FYI, Doug -- This .signature sanitized for your protection