# Portmaster -PP fails cause ports are newer than packages



## killerklown (Jan 5, 2013)

Hi, guys!
I want to install only binary packages on my freebsd 9 with portmaster so i've used:

`# portmaster -PP -w shells/bash`

but the output was:


```
===>>> The newest available package (bash-4.1.11)
                is older than the version in ports (bash-4.2.37)

==>>> Try --packages-if-newer, or do not use -PP/--packages-only
==>>> Aborting update
```

Now... I don't mind if a port is newer for a minor version to the binary... I prefer always binaries to compiling source code because it takes less time.
Is it possible to prevent portmaster aborting my installations if it find a newer version in the ports?


----------



## formateur_fou (Jan 6, 2013)

I don't think portmaster will install packages if the version in the packages repository does not match the one in the port tree.
You can use pkg_add or pkg for this depending of what is in use on your system.
But if you set the PACKAGESITE variable in your root .cshrc file to use the latest packages available instead of those at release time, you may have better luck with portmaster :

```
PACKAGESITE=ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports/amd64/packages-9-stable/Latest/
```
In my case I run 9.1 on AMD. Adapt this variable to your system.


----------



## jrm@ (Jan 6, 2013)

killerklown said:
			
		

> Is it possible to prevent portmaster aborting my installations if it find a newer version in the ports?



Yes, just use the -P flag and not -PP.


----------



## formateur_fou (Jan 6, 2013)

jrm said:
			
		

> Yes, just use the -P flag and not -PP.


But in this case, portmaster will not use packages and will install from sources.


----------



## jrm@ (Jan 6, 2013)

I didn't read the OP carefully enough.  If he *only* wants to install binary packages regardless of what's in ports tree, then yes, the package tools are probably the way to go.  But he also says he wasnt to install only binary packages *with portmaster*.  I don't imagine portmaster would be happy (even with only -P flag) if the ports tree were missing??


----------



## killerklown (Jan 7, 2013)

I've set the PACKAGESITE var, but still have the same error :/
btw, I meant that I want to install only binary packages. Is not possible to manage 'em with portmaster? Do I have to use pkg_* tools?


----------



## cpm@ (Jan 7, 2013)

killerklown said:
			
		

> Hi, guys!
> I want to install only binary packages on my freebsd 9 with portmaster so i've used:
> 
> `# portmaster -PP -w shells/bash`
> ...



From portmaster(8):


> *--update-if-newer*
> (only for multiple ports listed on the command line) do not rebuild/reinstall if the installed version is up to date



`# portmaster -PP --update-if-newer` 

The --update-if-newer flag is only useful if you're feeding portmaster a list of ports, some of which are already up to date.


----------



## killerklown (Jan 8, 2013)

> From portmaster(8):
> Quote:
> --update-if-newer
> (only for multiple ports listed on the command line) do not rebuild/reinstall if the installed version is up to date
> ...



So? I'm not using --update-if-newer. The problem shows in the installation of even a single packet (bash, in that case) because the port version is newer than the packet version.


----------



## cpm@ (Jan 8, 2013)

Mmm... you can make a binary package for the port. See ports(7), the package target.

```
# cd /usr/ports/shells/bash
# make package
```

Is needed to know the *R-deps* (Running dependencies) for port you want install, do following:

```
# cd /usr/ports
# make search name=bash
Port:	bash-4.2.37
Path:	/usr/ports/shells/bash
Info:	The GNU Project's Bourne Again SHell
Maint:	obrien@FreeBSD.org
B-deps:	bison-2.5.1,1 gettext-0.18.1.1 libiconv-1.14 m4-1.4.16_1,1
R-deps:	gettext-0.18.1.1 libiconv-1.14
WWW:	http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/bash/bashtop.html
```

So you will need create a package for gettext and libiconv as well.

Finally, use portmaster(8) --local-packagedir=<path> option to install created packages.


----------



## blackhaz (Jan 8, 2013)

I wonder why nobody mentions the pkg_upgrade tool? Is it not that desirable?


----------

