# New versions that break functionality should go into a NEW port!



## pvanulden (May 30, 2012)

This may have been touched on somewhere else already but it probably deserves to be said again:

*Rolling upgrades into current ports that break functionality should be avoided whenever possible.*

PHP 5.4 should NEVER have been rolled into the php5 port. There should have been a new php54 port so that upgrades can be easily managed.  I know many admins (myself included) who often patch their boxes with [cmd=]portupgrade -ai[/cmd] and I've almost never had to worry about stuff breaking.

I appreciate all the work that goes into maintaining ports but not dealing with stuff like this properly hurts FreeBSD as a whole.

Cheers!


----------



## SirDice (May 30, 2012)

I would suggest ranting on the freebsd-ports@ mailinglist. There aren't a lot of maintainers here.

http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports


----------



## gkontos (May 30, 2012)

pvanulden said:
			
		

> This may have been touched on somewhere else already but it probably deserves to be said again:
> 
> *Rolling upgrades into current ports that break functionality should be avoided whenever possible.*
> 
> ...



I agree that this shouldn't have happened. I also believe that php should not have a default port version. 

But most serious admins should not just use ports-mgmt/portupgrade without first reading the man pages or /ports/UPDATING first.

No offense!


----------



## pvanulden (May 30, 2012)

gkontos said:
			
		

> But most serious admins should not just use ports-mgmt/portupgrade without first reading the man pages or /ports/UPDATING first.
> 
> No offense!


None taken...I agree.


----------



## DutchDaemon (May 30, 2012)

One more reason to incorporate pkg_updating(1) into your admin tasks.


----------



## phoenix (May 30, 2012)

The first  rule of port upgrades:  thou shalt read UPDATING.
The second rule of port upgrades:  *THOU SHALT READ UPDATING!*
The third  rule of port upgrades:  thou shalt not use *-a* with any port management tools.

  Perhaps we need to carve these into stone somewhere, and burn a bush or two?


----------



## pvanulden (May 31, 2012)

I've burned me plenty of bushes! 

I usually do skim through UPDATING but not always.  I've been using ports since they were introduced in FreeBSD and the few times that blanket upgrades didn't go well, they were easy enough to resolve.  This was one of those times and while yes, I agree, it was through no fault other than my own, my point was that for a port with so many other dependent ports, upgrades which aren't backwards compatible should really go in a new version port much the same way that samba, apache, etc work.


----------

