Thomas Backman wrote:
However, a new issue appeared... Kind of. I know I read something about portsnap and INDEX on the -current list recently, so I'm guessing this is related? Maybe not, though (see later in the mail).
libtool-1.5.26 ! Comparison failed
This is because the libtool-1.5.x port -- devel/libtool15 -- was renamedto devel/libtool22 and the port updated to libtool-1.22.x. See the 20090802 entry in /usr/ports/UPDATING for special instructions on how to
deal with this.
So... Using the index causes problems (or the opposite!). Could I be using an index for something like HEAD despite not using that ports tree? (Again, pretty new to this!)
No -- using the INDEX shows you what the INDEX is capable of showing you, which isn't everything you need to know when using the ports. You should get in the habit of casting an eye over /usr/ports/UPDATING any time you want to do an upgrade. There is only one ports tree, and you should be using the HEAD of it no matter what OS version you're running. There aren't any OS version specific branches -- just tags to mark the point in time at which support for a particular OS version was dropped, or to mark the specific set of ports bundled with a release. HEAD is a continuously moving target -- of the order of a hundred port updates will be checked in daily largely driven by the availability of new upsteam versions. The generated INDEXes are labeled with the OS major version, out of a choice of 5, 6, 7 or 8 -- which are the only OS versions the ports system is set up to work with right now. Actually, I think 5.x support may have been dropped already. The choice of 6, 7 or 8 covers all of the supported release branches and the bleeding edge 8-CURRENT stuff. Once the release of 8.0-STABLE happens, and the bleeding edge moves to 9-CURRENT there will be an INDEX-9 generated. The reason for the difference is that certain ports are not supported on all OS versions, some have variations in their dependency lists and some have a different set of default options, so the INDEX comes out differently on the different versions.
I don't know how the INDEX files work, but I do know (thank you DTrace) that INDEX-8 was the only one read during "pkg_version -vIL=".
Yes. You'll only use the INDEX corresponding to the major version of FreeBSD that you have installed. See portindex(5) for details of what the INDEX
contains.
Oh, and my understanding is that the INDEX-8 is fetched via portsnap? Running the "fetch update" took less than 20 seconds (the cron job ran about 2 hours ago, though), so I guess it cannot have been built (that does take a lot of time, yes?)?
Yes. Building the INDEX on a fairly beefy machine takes 20min or more and thrashes disk IO while doing so. The index available for download by: # cd /usr/ports # make fetchindex should be rebuilt approximately hourly, but it isn't unknown for problems toprevent a new INDEX being available for a number of hours. I believe the INDEXes portsnap supplies are generated similarly. In fact, depending on the
ports management software you use, the INDEX may be pretty much irrelevant -- portmaster(1) ignores it -- or certain discrepancies may be ignored -- portupgrade(1) uses data in the INDEX as a guide but double checks against the reality of the ports tree when working out what needs updating. If you've made any non-standard settings in /etc/make.conf such as, eg. runningmysql-5.1.x instead of the default mysql-5.0.x or using apache13 or enabling LDAP or SASL functionality then you may find it worthwhile to build your own INDEX[*]
as this can help avoid different bits of the system getting conflicting ideas
about exactly what depends on what.
Cheers,
Matthew
[*] Modesty prevents me from mentioning ports-mgmt/p5-FreeBSD-Portindex.
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
