# Best way to update



## Just_Johnny (Jan 31, 2009)

Scenario:  You keep several machines installed with Apache/PHP/MYSQL for backups/new-servers when you need them. 
(ports collection installed using portsnap)

So when the time comes to use one of these servers what is the best way to update it?  

Portupgrade?

Portmanager?

Portmaster?


----------



## lyuts (Jan 31, 2009)

To tell the truth, I would use portupgrade. Maybe it is just because I got used to it.


----------



## mousaka (Jan 31, 2009)

I like portmaster and use it on desktops and server. It has fewer dependecies and doesn't need a database compared portmaster.

But I think it depends a lot on your customs which one you prefer. Their functionality doesn't differ very much.

I don't know portmanager

mousaka


----------



## danger@ (Feb 1, 2009)

Added poll to the thread. May make it easier to summarize what people prefer.


----------



## ale (Feb 1, 2009)

I'm using portupgrade too.
I've started with it and I don't feel the need to change. Maybe I'm too lazy.
I also have a lot of entries as MAKE_ARGS in pkgtools.conf.

If you have to deal with several machines and you are using same options while building, have a look at the _-p_ option.
Maybe you have to `# mkdir /usr/ports/packages`.


----------



## Oko (Feb 1, 2009)

I would back up my configuration files, dump the home directory or whatever you need to save and do fresh installation. 
Unless there is security reason or the major feature which I need for my 
work implemented in the new version of the software I would not bother to 
"upgrade".


----------



## cajunman4life (Feb 1, 2009)

I switched to portmaster some time back, because I got tired of the ruby depend, and having to constantly fix the database.


----------



## kamikaze (Feb 2, 2009)

I use portmaster with pkg_libchk.


----------



## hydra (Feb 2, 2009)

Portmaster here, no database is needed and it works great.


----------



## tangram (Feb 2, 2009)

Portmaster. Like hydra said... no dependencies (no Ruby). Simple shell script.


----------



## graudeejs (Feb 3, 2009)

I use portmaster as well.
best thing about it: no dependencies.
also no manual database updates are necessary 
not to mention that it doesn't use own database


----------



## Djn (Feb 3, 2009)

Oko: An "upgrade" done with portupgrade or portmaster will compile the new version, deinstall the old version, and then install the new version. How is that different?


----------



## ctaranotte (Feb 4, 2009)

Being there, done that.

All in all Portmaster is the way to go.


----------



## kamikaze (Feb 4, 2009)

Djn said:
			
		

> Oko: An "upgrade" done with portupgrade or portmaster will compile the new version, deinstall the old version, and then install the new version. How is that different?


It also updates dependencies and can roll-back if install fails.


----------



## mecano (Feb 5, 2009)

I'm switching to portmaster, my system is already bloated with useless portupgrade dependencies. I'm curious to hear someone about portmanager though, anybody tried it?


----------



## jotawski (Feb 6, 2009)

i faced several problems with portupgrade and still have some now but i use portupgrade for upgrading my ports tree.


----------



## dave (Feb 7, 2009)

*portmaster*

I recently switched from portupgrade to portmaster and... my headache is gone!


----------

