[PC-BSD Testing] Testing Digest, Vol 26, Issue 26

Ian Robinson fitchkendall at gmail.com
Tue Mar 17 15:00:39 PST 2009


  4. Re: Runports (root) Make Update (Solved) (Sander Holthaus)
>   7. Re: Runports (root) Make Update (Solved) (Kris Moore)
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:37:16 +0100
> From: Sander Holthaus <info at 2insite.nl>
>
> On 17-3-2009 13:28, Ian Robinson wrote:
> > I attempted a few more times yesterday, each time stopping on ORBit2
> > part of the install.



>
> The ports tree can "break" occasionally, usually because something is
> wrong with the dependencies or the ports-database is not up-to-date.
>


> > 2.  What exactly does the "make" command do?  Does it compile a
> > database of ports or install certain key ports into the PCBSD ports tree?
>


> It depends where the make command is given and what the arguments are.
> Best read up on it in the FreeBSD handbook, while make is quite a simple
> command, the various arguments and uses make it a bit complex.
> >
>
> 4.  What is up with the having to make numerous inputs at the blue
> > options screens -- that slows down the installation and requires the
> > user to sit for hours watching the install.
>


> Than you shouldn't use the ports tree / compile things. The reason
> people use ports instead of packages is that you can set all these
> options. You only need to do it once however. The ports tree is really
> meant for more advanced uses, for normal installs of ports, use packages
> (though I don't know how PCBSD deals with those).
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:24:28 -0400
> From: Kris Moore <kris at pcbsd.com>
>
>
> Sander Holthaus wrote:
> > On 17-3-2009 13:28, Ian Robinson wrote:
> >> I attempted a few more times yesterday, each time stopping on ORBit2
> >> part of the install.
> > The ports tree can "break" occasionally, usually because something is
> > wrong with the dependencies or the ports-database is not up-to-date.
>
> Thats right, often things in the ports tree are broken, so its best to
> update it often and see if that fixes the bug :)
>
>
> >> 4.  What is up with the having to make numerous inputs at the blue
> >> options screens -- that slows down the installation and requires the
> >> user to sit for hours watching the install.
> > Than you shouldn't use the ports tree / compile things. The reason
> > people use ports instead of packages is that you can set all these
> > options. You only need to do it once however. The ports tree is really
> > meant for more advanced uses, for normal installs of ports, use packages
> > (though I don't know how PCBSD deals with those).
>
> Correct, also if you want to get rid of the blue options screen, edit
> /etc/make.conf and uncomment BATCH=yes, this makes it take all the
> defaults. Also through the "makeports" option, you can use pkg_add if
> you like at the same time. You'll want to refer to the FreeBSD docs for
> usage on this.
>
> --
>
> Kris Moore
> PC-BSD Software
> http://www.pcbsd.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>


THANK YOU Sander and Kris.

I update my ports tree frequently -- every couple of days -- and it never
ceases to amaze me how busy the ports committers are because of the number
of updates available each time.  No matter how recently I may have updated,
I always update ports immediately before installing anything from ports or
before using portupgrade.  Here, I upgraded each time before working with
runports.

Perhaps the difference between success and failure was a day or two and a
broken port or its dependency on the first two tries.  On the other hand,
perhaps runports would not complete because at some of the screens I chose a
couple of options other than the defaults.  The successful install was
nothing but the defaults.

Although I know what a makefile is and does, and in many cases, I can read
what's inside them effectively, what I did not know was where was this
global "make" coming from.  It was not like I was in a ports subdirectory
running make install clean on the resident makefile.  So, I was referring
not to makefiles in general, but to this one in particular.  Thank you Kris
for the direction.

It has only been lately (last several days) that I have ever recall seeing
the blue option screens while processing ports (other than using
sysinstall).  At first I thought it was because 7.1 is in beta.  However, I
was running portupgrade on one of my 1.5.1 installations and I was seeing
the option screen there too.  I am grateful to know that I can run
unattended jumping past the defaults by tweaking /etc/make.conf.

Kris -- Is the runports make because of the new arrangement separating
/usr/ports from PCBSD installed ports, and will all users have to compile
that after installation.

Ian Robinson
Salem, Ohio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.pcbsd.org/pipermail/testing/attachments/20090317/36c05509/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Testing mailing list