On 1/02/2014 6:45 PM, Guido Falsi wrote:
On 02/01/14 08:42, Guido Falsi wrote:
On 02/01/14 08:36, nano wrote:
I appreciate your advice, but I think I will wait before updating
these
ports. Hopefully things get cleaned up a bit. I would not be happy if
something breaks.
I understand. I still have not had a good look at r341775 and have only
built ports affected by it in poudrirere, and using them as binary
packages, which works fine.
I may create a jail to somewhat emulate my live environment and conduct
a test run to see if any problems arise.
As a personal suggestion, if you have the expertise to do that, you
should investigate using poudriere to build your own binary packages
repository and upgrade your live, production systems from there.
I do intend to setup my own repository with Poudriere but have been
delaying for some unknown reason (read: laziness). In fact, I think I
will do this in the next few days. It will make things much more efficient.
Forgot to mention, if you're not using any non standard option in your
systems and using only RELEASES, then you could directly use the
packages from the official repositories.
I try to use packages where I can, but often programs require
non-default build options so I have to build from ports. I'm often
warned to not mix ports with packages; what is your take on this?
--
bsdbox.co
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
