Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
> Hmm, let me cite your letter in this thread:
This isn't a court of law. :)
> sysutils/portconf does not have that limitation. If you specify flags using
> that method, they will always be used.
>
> FYI,
>
> Doug
> =
lov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Vivek Khera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Todorov @ Paladin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
freebsd-stable
Subject: Re: 5.5 to 6.1 upgrade
Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:07:45PM +0300, Todorov @ Paladin wrote:
Also - why portupgrade is no
Dmitry Pryanishnikov wrote:
> I've tried to use sysutils/portconf, but found that it still doesn't
> give an universal solution:
I think we need to be careful what our expectations of "universal" are with
a ports tree as large, and a userbase as diverse, as what we have. However ...
> 1) it do
Hello!
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006, Ruslan Ermilov wrote:
It depends. If options are OPTIONS (in the ports sense), they
are saved and independent of portupgrade. If options are
sysutils/portconf does not have that limitation. If you specify flags using
that method, they will always be used.
True.
On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:51:52PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
> 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 OPTION
Chuck Swiger:
>FreeBSD's COMPAT stuff will let you run binaries
>compiled against an older version of FreeBSD just fine for almost all
>circumstances. However, as soon as you try to install a new port
>which depends on something already installed, or upgrade anything,
>you pretty much real
On Aug 23, 2006, at 4:41 PM, Greg Byshenk wrote:
As a possible point of clarification, my comments earlier (and, I
suspect similar comments of others) were not meant to imply that one
should not rebuild ports after a major upgrade, but only that one need
not do so _before_ upgrading.
[...probabl
On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 12:23:00PM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote:
> In practice, however, pretty much all software nowadays depends on
> shared libraries, so it's reasonable to do a "pkg_delete -a" after
> upgrading to a new major version of FreeBSD, and then reinstall all
> of the ports you us
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.
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 optio
> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 23:07:45 +0300
> From: "Todorov @ Paladin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Vivek Khera напиÑа:
> >
> > On Aug 22, 2006, at 2:56 PM, Todorov @ Paladin wrote:
> >
> >>> don't find this out the hard way :-(
> >>>
> >> How to find which is dynamically
Vivek Khera написа:
>
> On Aug 22, 2006, at 2:56 PM, Todorov @ Paladin wrote:
>
>>> don't find this out the hard way :-(
>>>
>> How to find which is dynamically using libs and which application is
>> not?
>>
>> This is something I was wondering before...
>>
>> Thank you in advance.
>
> path of leas
On Aug 22, 2006, at 2:56 PM, Todorov @ Paladin wrote:
don't find this out the hard way :-(
How to find which is dynamically using libs and which application
is not?
This is something I was wondering before...
Thank you in advance.
path of least resistance: upgrade everything. :-)
somet
On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Todorov @ Paladin wrote:
[ ... ]
How to find which is dynamically using libs and which application
is not?
You can use ldd.
In practice, however, pretty much all software nowadays depends on
shared libraries, so it's reasonable to do a "pkg_delete -a" after
u
Vivek Khera написа:
>
> On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:37 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
>
>>> It shouldn't be necessary to rebuild ports before the upgrade. If
>>> there is something running that is critical, you might want to upgrade
>> [ ... ]
>> Good to confirm. I haven't so many ports installed that I couldn't
On Aug 22, 2006, at 11:37 AM, Ian Smith wrote:
It shouldn't be necessary to rebuild ports before the upgrade. If
there is something running that is critical, you might want to
upgrade
[ ... ]
Good to confirm. I haven't so many ports installed that I couldn't
start from scratch if it all fe
Thanks to all who responded for the collective good advice.
On Tue, 22 Aug 2006, Greg Byshenk wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:52:02PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> > Am 21.08.2006 um 18:19 schrieb Ian Smith:
>
> > >I recently (without drama) upgraded a 5.4-RELEASE system to
> > >FreeBSD
On Monday 21 August 2006 13:56, Vivek Khera wrote:
> On Aug 21, 2006, at 12:19 PM, Ian Smith wrote:
> > 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 you
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:52:02PM +0200, Stefan Bethke wrote:
> Am 21.08.2006 um 18:19 schrieb Ian Smith:
> >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 pre
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
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
21 matches
Mail list logo
