Professional Web Applications Themes

If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade? - FreeBSD

If I just do: cvsup -g -L 2 /etc/cvsupfile && portmanager -u Do I need portupgrade at all then? Thanks. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Henson" <rr.com> To: "Fafa Diliha Romanova" <com> Subject: Re: portsdb -uU error (I also need some tips) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:01:03 +0000   > > It looks like a problem with /var/db/pkg. You have time to wipe > /var/db/pkg and remove all ports? Try portmanager before you wipe > your ports and db. > > Have you cd /usr/ports && mkae fetchindex? >  > > chmod error? Are you root or what? ...

  1. #1

    Default If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?


    If I just do:

    cvsup -g -L 2 /etc/cvsupfile && portmanager -u

    Do I need portupgrade at all then?

    Thanks.

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Jason Henson" <rr.com>
    To: "Fafa Diliha Romanova" <com>
    Subject: Re: portsdb -uU error (I also need some tips)
    Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 19:01:03 +0000
     
    >
    > It looks like a problem with /var/db/pkg. You have time to wipe
    > /var/db/pkg and remove all ports? Try portmanager before you wipe
    > your ports and db.
    >
    > Have you cd /usr/ports && mkae fetchindex?

    >
    > chmod error? Are you root or what?

    >
    > Don't do pkgdb unattended, you may need to answer questions. You
    > could skip all this index stuff if you use portmanager. But you
    > need
    > /var/db/pkg in good condition to use pormanager, I think? [/ref]

    --
    __________________________________________________ _________
    Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
    http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm

    Fafa Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sunday 13 March 2005 12:05 pm, Fafa Diliha Romanova wrote: 

    Not for upgrading. portsclean (a part of portsupgrade package) is a
    nice feature of portupgrade, so is pkg_which and a few others
    so I keep portupgrade around just the same.

    -Mike
    Michael Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Michael C. Shultz wrote: 
    >
    >
    > Not for upgrading. portsclean (a part of portsupgrade package) is a
    > nice feature of portupgrade, so is pkg_which and a few others
    > so I keep portupgrade around just the same.
    >
    > -Mike[/ref]

    How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    time as portupgrade for each run?

    Chris
    Chris Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Chris Hodgins wrote: 
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Not for upgrading. portsclean (a part of portsupgrade package) is a
    >> nice feature of portupgrade, so is pkg_which and a few others
    >> so I keep portupgrade around just the same.
    >>
    >> -Mike[/ref]
    >
    >
    > How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    > time as portupgrade for each run?
    >
    > Chris[/ref]

    The time is about the same (in my experiance) AND (most importantly)
    portmanager seems to handle upgrading better then portupgrade does.

    IE: Thunderbird, Gnome, Firefox.

    Another nifty thing is that portmanager creates a package and dumps it
    in /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird (for example) and at least for me, I can
    pkg_add that to my laptop since they both run 5.3

    --
    Best regards,
    Chris

    Misery no longer loves company
    nowdays it insists on it.
    Chris Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sunday 13 March 2005 12:38 pm, you wrote: 
    > >
    > > Not for upgrading. portsclean (a part of portsupgrade package) is
    > > a nice feature of portupgrade, so is pkg_which and a few others so
    > > I keep portupgrade around just the same.
    > >
    > > -Mike[/ref]
    >
    > How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    > time as portupgrade for each run?
    >
    > Chris[/ref]

    That is a tough question here is how it tends to work for me:

    First I run it everyday since I'm developing it I have to know if there
    is anything changed in ports that is going to cause portmanager to
    crash. Most days it takes less than an hour, but sometimes when
    just one lower level port like gettext for example is updated it may
    take 24 hours to finish. I'm using a 1ghz machine with both gnome
    and kde (all together about 300 installed ports) as an example.

    Here is exactly how portmanager works:

    First dependent ports that are out of date are upgraded, then everything
    that depends on them are upgraded. portupgrade does not work this same
    way so the time comparison is very tough to predict.

    -Mike

    Michael Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Chris Hodgins wrote: 
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> The time is about the same (in my experiance) AND (most importantly)
    >> portmanager seems to handle upgrading better then portupgrade does.
    >>
    >> IE: Thunderbird, Gnome, Firefox.
    >>
    >> Another nifty thing is that portmanager creates a package and dumps it
    >> in /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird (for example) and at least for me, I can
    >> pkg_add that to my laptop since they both run 5.3
    >>[/ref]
    >
    > Excellent. Does it leave packages for everything or is just thunderbird
    > that does this?
    >[/ref]

    I assume so - I just checked Firefox - and its in there.


    --
    Best regards,
    Chris

    The tendency of smoke from a cigarette, barbeque,
    campfire, etc. to drift into a person's face varies
    directly with that person's sensitivity to smoke.
    Chris Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Chris wrote: 
    >>
    >>
    >>How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    >>time as portupgrade for each run?
    >>
    >>Chris[/ref]
    >
    >
    > The time is about the same (in my experiance) AND (most importantly)
    > portmanager seems to handle upgrading better then portupgrade does.
    >
    > IE: Thunderbird, Gnome, Firefox.
    >
    > Another nifty thing is that portmanager creates a package and dumps it
    > in /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird (for example) and at least for me, I can
    > pkg_add that to my laptop since they both run 5.3
    >[/ref]

    Excellent. Does it leave packages for everything or is just thunderbird
    that does this?
    Chris Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Michael C. Shultz wrote: 
    >>
    >>How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    >>time as portupgrade for each run?
    >>
    >>Chris[/ref]
    >
    >
    > That is a tough question here is how it tends to work for me:
    >
    > First I run it everyday since I'm developing it I have to know if there
    > is anything changed in ports that is going to cause portmanager to
    > crash. Most days it takes less than an hour, but sometimes when
    > just one lower level port like gettext for example is updated it may
    > take 24 hours to finish. I'm using a 1ghz machine with both gnome
    > and kde (all together about 300 installed ports) as an example.
    >
    > Here is exactly how portmanager works:
    >
    > First dependent ports that are out of date are upgraded, then everything
    > that depends on them are upgraded. portupgrade does not work this same
    > way so the time comparison is very tough to predict.
    >
    > -Mike
    >[/ref]

    Ah I see. So portmanager is sort of doing the equivelant to:
    portupgrade -fr myOutOfDatePort ??

    Does this not mean it will always be slower than portupgrade? If it a
    low-level port it is going to take ages but if it is high-level it will
    start to get closer to the time it takes for portupgrade to run. Never
    faster? Or am I missing something.

    Is there a reason it does it this way over portupgrades method?

    Chris
    Chris Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sunday 13 March 2005 12:40 pm, Chris wrote: 
    > >
    > > How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount
    > > of time as portupgrade for each run?
    > >
    > > Chris[/ref]
    >
    > The time is about the same (in my experiance) AND (most importantly)
    > portmanager seems to handle upgrading better then portupgrade does.
    >
    > IE: Thunderbird, Gnome, Firefox.
    >
    > Another nifty thing is that portmanager creates a package and dumps
    > it in /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird (for example) and at least for me,
    > I can pkg_add that to my laptop since they both run 5.3[/ref]

    Chris, check and see if you have a /usr/ports/packages directory. If
    you do then all the packages will end up in /usr/ports/packages/All and
    a tree of symlinks will be made under /usr/ports/packages for the ports
    that have packages.

    For some reason when you first set up FreeBSD/ports it does not make
    the /usr/ports/packages directory so the packages end up in the ports
    directory, this isn't a good place for them, here is why:

    When a port is removed, see /usr/ports/MOVED, cvsup should be able to
    delete the directory but if a package is setting in there it can't, so
    over time you will come across port directories that have just a
    package in it and maybe a readme.html file but nothing else. It will
    keep things leaner/cleaner if the packages directory exists. I keep
    meaning to submit a PR about the missing packages directory but never
    seem to get around to it :(

    One other thing just to let you know, I've been testing portmanager
    against this new gnome update, when its done there is a bunch of
    gstreamer-plugins-* left un-upgraded. I just tried
    pkg_delete -f gstreamer-plugins-* on them and let portmanager -u bring
    them back in, it seems to be working but I also cvsup'ed and there is
    so many new changes it will be awhile before I know for sure.

    Right now I'm telling anyone who asks to try pkg_delete -f
    gstreamer-plugins-* first before upgrading with portmanager if they use
    gnome.

    -Mike







    Michael Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Michael C. Shultz wrote: 
    >>
    >>The time is about the same (in my experiance) AND (most importantly)
    >>portmanager seems to handle upgrading better then portupgrade does.
    >>
    >>IE: Thunderbird, Gnome, Firefox.
    >>
    >>Another nifty thing is that portmanager creates a package and dumps
    >>it in /usr/ports/mail/thunderbird (for example) and at least for me,
    >>I can pkg_add that to my laptop since they both run 5.3[/ref]
    >
    >
    > Chris, check and see if you have a /usr/ports/packages directory. If
    > you do then all the packages will end up in /usr/ports/packages/All and
    > a tree of symlinks will be made under /usr/ports/packages for the ports
    > that have packages.
    >
    > For some reason when you first set up FreeBSD/ports it does not make
    > the /usr/ports/packages directory so the packages end up in the ports
    > directory, this isn't a good place for them, here is why:
    >
    > When a port is removed, see /usr/ports/MOVED, cvsup should be able to
    > delete the directory but if a package is setting in there it can't, so
    > over time you will come across port directories that have just a
    > package in it and maybe a readme.html file but nothing else. It will
    > keep things leaner/cleaner if the packages directory exists. I keep
    > meaning to submit a PR about the missing packages directory but never
    > seem to get around to it :(
    >
    > One other thing just to let you know, I've been testing portmanager
    > against this new gnome update, when its done there is a bunch of
    > gstreamer-plugins-* left un-upgraded. I just tried
    > pkg_delete -f gstreamer-plugins-* on them and let portmanager -u bring
    > them back in, it seems to be working but I also cvsup'ed and there is
    > so many new changes it will be awhile before I know for sure.
    >
    > Right now I'm telling anyone who asks to try pkg_delete -f
    > gstreamer-plugins-* first before upgrading with portmanager if they use
    > gnome.
    >
    > -Mike
    >[/ref]
    Mike

    Like Chris I have packages scattered in my ports directories. I have
    just started using Portmanager. I have now created /usr/ports/packages
    directory. Do I need to move the packages one at a time from the
    individual ports directories? Will running portmanager again find them
    and move them?

    Thanks for all the positive, active maintenance of this port.

    Robert
    Robert Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?


    On Mar 13, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Michael C. Shultz wrote:
     
    >>
    >> How long does it take to run portmanager. Is it a similar amount of
    >> time as portupgrade for each run?
    >>
    >> Chris[/ref]
    >
    > That is a tough question here is how it tends to work for me:
    >
    > First I run it everyday since I'm developing it I have to know if there
    > is anything changed in ports that is going to cause portmanager to
    > crash. Most days it takes less than an hour, but sometimes when
    > just one lower level port like gettext for example is updated it may
    > take 24 hours to finish. I'm using a 1ghz machine with both gnome
    > and kde (all together about 300 installed ports) as an example.
    >
    > Here is exactly how portmanager works:
    >
    > First dependent ports that are out of date are upgraded, then
    > everything
    > that depends on them are upgraded. portupgrade does not work this same
    > way so the time comparison is very tough to predict.[/ref]

    Just to add some experiences, I've been using Portmanager for probably
    a few months now (would need to check through old postings and notes to
    find out for sure) and have found it to be about the same amount of
    time for doing updates as portupgrade, but there's less babysitting of
    the server and I've not had any trouble using Portmanager. There was a
    bug that caused a loop in some updates but Michael fixed it in a very
    short amount of time and released the fixed version.

    It doesn't seem to rely on the index for the ports, so it may actually
    be faster. I don't have to run any operations to fix or reindex my
    ports as I've had to do sometimes in the past with portupgrade.

    Portmanager has made most of my updating a no-brainer, and I've been
    thankful that Michael was fast to fix problems when I reported what
    little I ran into. And this is on an in-use production server....I
    trust it with the updates, so either it's a program that works very
    well or I've been very lucky :-)

    I'd definitely recommend new users try using Portmanager for keeping
    their ports up to date. It is simple and straightforward to use and
    doesn't confuse newer users with details like manipulating the ports
    index. It's just a "portmanager -u" and off it goes...check in once in
    awhile to see how it's progressing and that's it. Makes updating as
    simple as the process of installing a new port :-)

    -Bart

    Bart Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    Bart Silverstrim wrote:
     


    Agreed - I to use it on a production boxen - and as Bart has said,
    either it's a great product or I have been lucky also.

    Best regards,
    Chris
    Chris Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 20:52:25 +0000, Chris Hodgins
    <strath.ac.uk> wrote: 

    It will create packages for every port that it updates and place them
    under the usual /usr/ports/packages structure.

    Al
    --
    LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone
    GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
    Alistair Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:13:35 -0800, Michael C. Shultz
    <com> wrote: 

    I'm about 3% through the upgrade for that now. I had it going this
    afternoon when I was mucking around at a friend's workplace.

    I'm sure I've seen it mention that some gstreamer-plugins needed
    upgrading but I've not paid that much attention :-)
     

    I'll let you know if my system gets upgraded without any issues or if
    the gstreamer stuff still needs manual attention.

    Al

    --
    LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone
    GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
    Alistair Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sunday 13 March 2005 04:06 pm, Alistair Sutton wrote: 
    >
    > It will create packages for every port that it updates and place them
    > under the usual /usr/ports/packages structure.
    >
    > Al[/ref]

    I should mention Al here provided the code to add an interactive
    update option to portmanager. With version 0.2.9_3 portmanager-ui
    will let you make Y/N decisions on which ports to update. I've just
    submitted it to FreeBSD so should be in the Tree sometime in the next
    24 hours.

    -Mike
    Michael Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 13:28:14 -1000, Robert Marella <com> wrote: 

    I don't think portmanager will find and move them but if the port gets
    upgraded again then it'll recreate the packages in
    /usr/ports/packages.

    The best thing would possibly be to just search for all *.tbz files
    under /usr/ports and move them into /usr/ports/packages/All if you
    want them all in the same place.

    I don't think it will affect any distfiles but I'm not sure if there
    are any that have a .tbz suffix.

    Al
    --
    LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone
    GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
    Alistair Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 16:12:21 -0800, Michael C. Shultz
    <com> wrote: 
    > >
    > > It will create packages for every port that it updates and place them
    > > under the usual /usr/ports/packages structure.
    > >
    > > Al[/ref]
    >
    > I should mention Al here provided the code to add an interactive
    > update option to portmanager. With version 0.2.9_3 portmanager-ui
    > will let you make Y/N decisions on which ports to update. I've just
    > submitted it to FreeBSD so should be in the Tree sometime in the next
    > 24 hours.[/ref]

    And so my plan for world domination starts ;-)

    Al
    --
    LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone
    GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
    Alistair Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sunday 13 March 2005 04:11 pm, Alistair Sutton wrote: 
    >
    > I'm about 3% through the upgrade for that now. I had it going this
    > afternoon when I was mucking around at a friend's workplace.
    >
    > I'm sure I've seen it mention that some gstreamer-plugins needed
    > upgrading but I've not paid that much attention :-)

    >
    > I'll let you know if my system gets upgraded without any issues or if
    > the gstreamer stuff still needs manual attention.
    >
    > Al[/ref]

    Thanks All, its running OK on my system but there are 55 more ports
    still to upgrade! I hope yours is a little faster.

    -Mike
    Michael Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On 03/13/05 15:57:23, Chris Hodgins wrote: 
    >>
    >>
    >> That is a tough question here is how it tends to work for me:
    >>
    >> First I run it everyday since I'm developing it I have to know if
    >> there
    >> is anything changed in ports that is going to cause portmanager to
    >> crash. Most days it takes less than an hour, but sometimes when
    >> just one lower level port like gettext for example is updated it may
    >> take 24 hours to finish. I'm using a 1ghz machine with both gnome
    >> and kde (all together about 300 installed ports) as an example.
    >>
    >> Here is exactly how portmanager works:
    >>
    >> First dependent ports that are out of date are upgraded, then
    >> everything
    >> that depends on them are upgraded. portupgrade does not work this
    >> same way so the time comparison is very tough to predict.
    >>
    >> -Mike
    >>[/ref]
    >
    > Ah I see. So portmanager is sort of doing the equivelant to:
    > portupgrade -fr myOutOfDatePort ??
    >
    > Does this not mean it will always be slower than portupgrade? If it
    > a low-level port it is going to take ages but if it is high-level it
    > will start to get closer to the time it takes for portupgrade to run.
    > Never faster? Or am I missing something.
    >
    > Is there a reason it does it this way over portupgrades method?
    >
    > Chris
    > _______________________________________________[/ref]
    I think there is no big difference between just running portupgrade vs
    portmanager. I would say portmanager is better and faster because you
    don't need to baby sit, it is really automagical, and there is no
    messing with an index. To upgrade one high level port will take that
    same time on both, if you don't have to pkgdb -F or fiddle with the
    index. If it is a low level port portmanager will likely take longer,
    but get it done right the first time. If portupgrade finishes first it
    likely missed some cross dependancies and you will have to do it by
    hand after you have done some trouble shooting. The best part about
    portmanager for is NO RUBY!

    Jason Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: If I have portmanager, do I need portupgrade?

    On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 17:02:59 -0800, Michael C. Shultz
    <com> wrote: 

    I've got a P4m 2.2GHz so it isn't that slow. My problem is that I have
    too much stuff on my drive and so performance suffers cause I'm nearly
    always 99% full :-D

    I may get chance to have it finished tonight (or at least get enough
    of the core stuff done that I can start using the desktop again).

    Al
    --
    LJ: http://www.livejournal.com/users/everlone
    GPG/PGP: http://www.no-dns-yet.org.uk/~everlone/pubkey.gpg
    Alistair Guest

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. expat portupgrade dies
    By Randy in forum FreeBSD
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 4th, 03:51 PM
  2. portmanager hosed
    By Michael C. Shultz in forum FreeBSD
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: February 16th, 06:24 PM
  3. apache2, suexec, and portupgrade
    By dave in forum FreeBSD
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: February 16th, 06:54 AM
  4. Portmanager output, what's it mean?
    By Benjamin Dover in forum FreeBSD
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: February 15th, 11:08 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139