Subject: Re: pkg/10835: Package upgrade procedure sucks
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
Date: 08/16/2000 17:16:46
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> In article <20000815030356.C74794CCE@yeah-baby.shagadelic.org>,
> > Instead, we should:
> > (1) Install new files over the old.
> There are numerous cases were this fail horribly because a sub package
> update requires a recompilation.
> firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
> > Special care should be taken for (2) -- the PLIST should
> > be able to specify "leave installed on upgrade", and a
> > package should be able to be labeled as "upgraded" if
> > these special PLIST entries exist, so that e.g. libfoo.1
> > and libfoo.2 can be present on the system at the same time.
> This not maintainable because it creates unpredictable behaviour of
> packages depending on their upgrade path.
One thing that shouldn't disrupt anything would be to run a
'download everything' pass _before_ deleting anything.
For those who have the disk space and time to burn, how about
an option to build everything in a chroot'ed environment,
including making binary packages. The upgrade pass could then be
a 'pkg_delete ...', followed by 'pkg_add ...'. Note - this would
be an option...
-- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --