Subject: Package update disaster
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Anand Buddhdev <email@example.com>
Date: 10/06/2004 21:59:14
This evening, after updating my pkgsrc, I used "lintpkgsrc -i" to find
out what was out of date on my system. I noticed that I had a slightly
older version of pth package. So I did:
Well, to my surprise and horror, this went on to erase my mysql-server
package installation! My mysql-server package was also old, but I did
not want to update it just yet. Now, I don't understand why the system
wanted to update mysql, when I was only interested in updating pth.
Secondly, I think the package build system should at least warn me of
this unexpected detour, and give me a chance to cancel it. Instead it
happily went on to remove the old mysql files from the system, and THEN
build the new version. So, while the new package was being built, there
were no mysql files around!
And finally, the system assumed that the build of the new package would
succeed, which it did not. In fact, there seems to be a bug at the
moment, which causes a build of mysql 4.0.20 to fail. So I started with
an update of the pth package, which ended up in a failed build of mysql,
leaving me without mysql on my running system :( I had to re-install
mysql from a pre-built package from an FTP server.
I must say that my initial excitement about pkgsrc is waning somewhat.
The pkgsrc guide recommends a user to type "make update" to update
packages. I think the guide should be more conservative, and teach a
user to be more cautious, and first type just "make", which will build
new packages, but not remove anything. And if all the builds and their
dependencies succeed, then proceed with a "make update".
And anyway, why does "make update" FIRST remove the old package? Would
it not make sense to first build the new package(s), and if all the
builds succeed, then to proceed with deleting the old packages and
replacing them with new ones? That makes for a very small package