Subject: Re: Package update disaster
To: Florian Stoehr <email@example.com>
From: Steven M. Bellovin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/07/2004 04:10:49
In message <Pine.NEB.email@example.com>, Flori
an Stoehr writes:
>On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Steven M. Bellovin wrote:
>> In message <Pine.NEB.firstname.lastname@example.org>, Florian Stoehr w
>>> Is there a perhaps simpler way to tell pkgsrc:
>>> "bring-EVERYTHING-up-to-date-and-don't-ask-for-further-input" ?
>>> "make update world"-like?
>> There is, but it's a bit complex. Here's a posting from Wolfgang S.
>> Rupprecht on 31 May 2004:
>> Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 21:01:45 -0700
>> To: port-i386@NetBSD.org
>> From: "Wolfgang S. Rupprecht" <wolfgang+gnus20040531T202330@dailyplanet.dont
>> Subject: Re: pkgsrc and already installed binary pkgs
>>> No, it's not great. But there aren't great solutions here, unless
>>> there's a thorough archive of many different versions of many packages.
>>> And it's even worse than I've just outlined, since you'll often find
>>> that something doesn't rebuild properly.
>> I've been looking at how some of the other BSD's handle this, and
>> pkgsrc (especially when augmented with pkgdepgraph and pkg_chk) is way
>> above the competition.
>> I found that updating the pkgsrc tree to -current and then using
>> "lintpkgsrc -i" to find the out of date pkgs and updating with
>> pkgdepgraph is the least painful way to go. Pain is relative though
>> and if something fundamental like png changes, expect 10-20 hours of
>> an unusable system with only the core non-pkgs utilities.
>> set -e
>> cd /usr/pkgsrc
>> cvs -dAP
>> lintpkgsrc -omr
>> lintpkgsrc -i > pkgdepgraph.in
>> pkgdepgraph -D pkgdepgraph.in > delete_order
>> pkgdepgraph -R pkgdepgraph.in > rebuild.sh
>> pkgdepgraph -F pkgdepgraph.in > fetch.sh
>> sh fetch.sh && mv fetch.sh fetch.sh~
>> pkg_delete `cat delete_order` && mv delete_order delete_order~
>> sh rebuild.sh
>> /bin/rm -f pkgdepgraph.in delete_order~ rebuild.sh fetch.sh~
>> Now on bad days, I may need to find what didn't rebuild, comment out
>> the broken build on rebuild.sh and rerun that by hand. Still it beats
>> rebuilding it all by hand.
>> --Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
>On a this-is-simple scale ranging from "1" to "10", this is a "12" :-(
Well, I did describe it as "a bit complex"...
>Hm ... maybe we should think about a mechanism for this, maybe also for a
>binary package updater? Just a though.
I agree. What I like best about this scheme is that it's reasonably robust,
and lets you recover from compilation failures -- you have a record of
the state before wiping out everything.
I agree that we should package it up. It does need some improvement;
it doesn't deal properly with packages that have been renamed, and
hence generate errors from lintpkgsrc.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb