Subject: pkgsrc update procedures
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Sascha Retzki <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/24/2005 18:00:44
many users complain that software installed with pkgsrc is hard to update.
I hear story like:
you make update in mail/evolution, new version depends on a newer version
of gtk, evolution and gtk are deleted, new versions are rebuild.
If the gtk fails, you have a problem.
Even if it does not fail, the old software is linked against the old gtk.
First of: is that entirely true? Any corrections in detail?
Let us go on. I can't get the sense behind that; Wouldn't it make much more
sense to build a new version of gtk and evolution in a temporary place, and
if that does not fail, install? That may be called a "update" target.
Then, you have two versions of gtk, which of course conflict in some way.
So you have another target, "update-tree", that rebuilds all programs depend
on gtk, and link to the new gtk. if nothing fails, delete the old gtk, install
all the new stuff. The "tree" has been updated.
Of course that is way more complicated, gtk depends on gdk, gdk depends on what-
not, such a "update-tree" target may even stupidly update every package that is
installed... However, it should never happen that your system is broken.
You should really build it all in a, I think the right term is "sandbox", and
just update the real system if nothing fails.
That, so far, is the theory. I guess it is hard from a practical point of view.
Anybody disagree, add want to something?
Is there already progress into that direction?