Hi!
I installed my software using csup and make install. Now there are new
versions available. How can i deinstall the old software with
depencies or upgrade the complete stuff? I want to use make for that
and it should ignore if an old version is already installed or
deinstall the old version automiticaly.
Cheers Markus
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-30T19:20:48+00:00
> Hi!
> I installed my software using csup and make install. Now there are new
you mean FreeBSD or some add on software?
as assume latter. you should use ports for installing software.
if there are no port for it, you should write it and contribute ;)
but if you already did this way, then you have 2 choices
1) there are often make deinstall in such sources working, it will work if
target directory will be the same as before
2) find out manually what files it put where and delete.
If you need to install software this was, try to set target directory base
not in /usr, to not make mess with base system, and not /usr/local - to
not mess with ports.
creating /usr/local2 is a good choice
Re: Deinstall software by Polytropon on
2009-05-30T19:34:08+00:00
On Sat, 30 May 2009 20:54:10 +0200, Markus K=FCnkler <markus@amobos.org> wr=
ote:
> Hi!
> I installed my software using csup and make install. Now there are new =20
> versions available. How can i deinstall the old software with =20
> depencies or upgrade the complete stuff? I want to use make for that =20
> and it should ignore if an old version is already installed or =20
> deinstall the old version automiticaly.
If you're talking about the OS itself, you can simply follow
the instractions in the handbook, where it explains the
upgrading of the system (including steps like make update,
make buildworld and buildkernel, mergemaster, and make
installkernel and installworld, maybe KERNCONF).
For the ports, you enter the port's directory, run
# make deinstall
and then
# make
# make install
# make clean
(you can of course combine it to "make install clean").
If you want to automate it, you can use tools from the portmgmt/
category, such as portupgrade or portmaster. <
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Polytropon on
2009-05-30T19:36:21+00:00
On Sat, 30 May 2009 21:20:13 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> If you need to install software this was, try to set target directory base
> not in /usr, to not make mess with base system, and not /usr/local - to
> not mess with ports.
>
> creating /usr/local2 is a good choice
You can even keep it out of /usr employing the /opt "Linuxism". :-)
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-30T20:35:43+00:00
>>
>> creating /usr/local2 is a good choice
>
> You can even keep it out of /usr employing the /opt "Linuxism". :-)
>
no matter what's the name, but it's good to have
/usr/local for ports-based installed things
/some/other/directory for hand-installed things
so both base system and ports are clearly separated
Re: Deinstall software by cpghost on
2009-05-30T21:51:38+00:00
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 09:35:35PM +0200, Polytropon wrote:
>
> You can even keep it out of /usr employing the /opt "Linuxism". :-)
/opt is actually a Solarism... ;-)
-cpghost.
Re: Deinstall software by Polytropon on
2009-05-30T21:56:52+00:00
On Sat, 30 May 2009 23:50:42 +0200, cpghost <cpghost@cordula.ws> wrote:
> /opt is actually a Solarism... ;-)
That's true, but nobody knows, because Solaris doesn't exist. :-)
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Glen Barber on
2009-05-30T22:55:32+00:00
Polytropon,
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote:
>
> You can even keep it out of /usr employing the /opt "Linuxism". :-)
>
For (my own) clarity sake, won't that take up space in '/'? (Not
arguing, just never thought of using /opt on FreeBSD...)
Re: Deinstall software by Polytropon on
2009-05-30T23:22:31+00:00
On Sat, 30 May 2009 18:55:15 -0400, Glen Barber <glen.j.barber@gmail.com> wrote:
> For (my own) clarity sake, won't that take up space in '/'? (Not
> arguing, just never thought of using /opt on FreeBSD...)
This depends on your file system layout, Glen. If you put
everything into one partition, i. e. /, then everything is
going into /.
If you have separate partitions, e. g. /, /tmp, /var, /usr
and /home, then /opt would take space on /. On most installations
that use this approach, / is "as big as needed" for what it
is used: the basic SUM stuff and mountpoints, nothing more.
Of couse, it's possible to extend the approach mentioned to
have another partition for /opt.
In order to not to deal with this problem, one could even make
a symlink /opt@ -> /usr/local2.
To summarize: You are correct. :-)
By the way, I've not seen anyone using /opt on FreeBSD yet,
I just wanted to mention that it is possible. (There are
other "Solarisisms" that I've already seen, such as /export
on FreeBSD which is usually used on Solaris for NFS shares.)
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Glen Barber on
2009-05-30T23:43:04+00:00
On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 May 2009 18:55:15 -0400, Glen Barber <glen.j.barber@gmail.com>=
wrote:
>> For (my own) clarity sake, won't that take up space in '/'? =A0(Not
>> arguing, just never thought of using /opt on FreeBSD...)
>
> This depends on your file system layout, Glen. If you put
> everything into one partition, i. e. /, then everything is
> going into /.
>
Ah, yes. I forgot people do that
Re: Deinstall software by Chris Rees on
2009-05-31T08:04:06+00:00
2009/5/31 Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>:
> On Sat, 30 May 2009 18:55:15 -0400, Glen Barber <glen.j.barber@gmail.com>=
wrote:
>> For (my own) clarity sake, won't that take up space in '/'? =A0(Not
>> arguing, just never thought of using /opt on FreeBSD...)
>
> This depends on your file system layout, Glen. If you put
> everything into one partition, i. e. /, then everything is
> going into /.
>
> If you have separate partitions, e. g. /, /tmp, /var, /usr
> and /home, then /opt would take space on /. On most installations
> that use this approach, / is "as big as needed" for what it
> is used: the basic SUM stuff and mountpoints, nothing more.
>
> Of couse, it's possible to extend the approach mentioned to
> have another partition for /opt.
>
> In order to not to deal with this problem, one could even make
> a symlink /opt@ -> /usr/local2.
>
> To summarize: You are correct. :-)
>
> By the way, I've not seen anyone using /opt on FreeBSD yet,
> I just wanted to mention that it is possible. (There are
> other "Solarisisms" that I've already seen, such as /export
> on FreeBSD which is usually used on Solaris for NFS shares.)
>
>
IIRC, I installed NetBeans onto my computer a really long time ago...
and it wormed into /opt. Disgraceful behaviour, I can't remember why I
didn't use ports. That was when I switched to Eclipse!
Chris
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-31T08:26:15+00:00
>>
>
> For (my own) clarity sake, won't that take up space in '/'? (Not
in my case yes as / is usually my only filesystem. for those who keep
programs (/usr) separate /usr/local2 or /usr/whatever will be OK
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-31T08:57:33+00:00
>
> This depends on your file system layout, Glen. If you put
> everything into one partition, i. e. /, then everything is
> going into /.
like in my case. with one exception - now i usually have /tmp separate but
it's tmpfs :)
> other "Solarisisms" that I've already seen, such as /export
> on FreeBSD which is usually used on Solaris for NFS shares.)
does Solaris REQUIRE things to be in /export to be able to export through
NFS or is it just some kind of tradition or routinely repeated rule?
Re: Deinstall software by Matthew Seaman on
2009-05-31T09:07:56+00:00
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
=20
>> other "Solarisisms" that I've already seen, such as /export
>> on FreeBSD which is usually used on Solaris for NFS shares.)
>=20
> does Solaris REQUIRE things to be in /export to be able to export=20
> through NFS or is it just some kind of tradition or routinely repeated =
> rule?
It's just a convention. Filesystems to be exported live under /export,
and are frequently automounted under /net/{hostname} or /home/{hostname}
depending on their intended purpose.
You don't have to arrange things like that, just as you don't have to
install ports under /usr/local. ie. you'ld have to have a pretty
good reason to go against the convention.
In fact, given that FreeBSD doesn't seem to have a native convention on
how exported filesystems are laid out (no mention in hier(7), no default
/etc/exports file), it would make sense to adopt the Solaris/Linux style =
where
feasible. Mount points etc. aren't going to work exactly the same due to=
Solaris/Linux preferentially using autofs and FreeBSD using amd(8) (yes, =
I
know there has been some progress on autofs under FreeBSD, but it's not 1=
00%
yet[*]), but from a user perspective it should all work the same.
Cheers,
Matthew
[*] http://www.fsl.cs.stonybrook.edu/docs/freebsd-autofs/autofs.pdf
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-31T09:16:17+00:00
> In fact, given that FreeBSD doesn't seem to have a native convention on
> how exported filesystems are laid out (no mention in hier(7), no default
> /etc/exports file), it would make sense to adopt the Solaris/Linux style
> where
> feasible.
it's best not to adopt any style, but do whatever is optimal in certain
case.
You propose just another example of "blind repeated rule".
Your idea won't hurt in single-disk, single-partition case, but this case
is prohibited by other "blind repeat" rule of making lots of partitions.
What if i want export things from multiple disks? just make one
another separete partition on each disk for /export/something just to
make system config look "nice" or "professional" because it's good to have
NFS exported things to stay in /export
Such practices gives only illusion or cleanliness and order, actually
giving exactly opposite.
Actually one ZFS adventage grown on this - it allows you to make millions
of "partitions" without actually creating them, because it's all still
stored in one pool. But those who feel configuration with a lots of
partitions "cleanness and order" are happy now.
I see this as just a pure mess, not an order.
Re: Deinstall software by Matthew Seaman on
2009-05-31T09:27:00+00:00
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> Your idea won't hurt in single-disk, single-partition case, but this=20
> case is prohibited by other "blind repeat" rule of making lots of=20
> partitions.
I didn't say anything about how file system layout should be mapped to
disk partitions[*]. Nor do I support the concept of making lots and lots =
of
small partitions. Check the archives: I'm one of the people that regular=
ly
advocates the 'one big root' style.
Cheers,
Matthew
[*] Although historically there have been bugs with NFS exports making it=
possible to access any files on the same partition, which would make a se=
parate
partition for /exports a damn good idea.
Re: Deinstall software by Polytropon on
2009-05-31T09:27:49+00:00
On Sun, 31 May 2009 11:15:19 +0200 (CEST), Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
> it's best not to adopt any style, but do whatever is optimal in certain
> case.
>
> You propose just another example of "blind repeated rule".
It is often found as "corporate standard". This doesn't mean you
have to use it on your own systems, but it helps to understand
why things are there and configured in a specific way.
With ZFS, of course, there's much room for improvement. :-)
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-31T10:49:10+00:00
>
>> Your idea won't hurt in single-disk, single-partition case, but this case
>> is prohibited by other "blind repeat" rule of making lots of partitions.
>
> I didn't say anything about how file system layout should be mapped to
> disk partitions[*]. Nor do I support the concept of making lots and lots of
> small partitions. Check the archives: I'm one of the people that regularly
> advocates the 'one big root' style.
I did't tell you said this, just compared the idea of "the only right
directory layout" with this.
> [*] Although historically there have been bugs with NFS exports making it
> possible to access any files on the same partition, which would make a
> separate
> partition for /exports a damn good idea.
And this is probably the reason for /exports tradition in Solaris. At
first - this is solution for some problem, then - it's dumbly repeated
even if problem doesn't exist any more.
The same with partitioning. In very very old unices with pre-FFS
filesystem it actually improved performance, speed up checking, improved
recovery so they did it. Now it no longer gives any adventage in most
cases, just gives problem of making one partition too small and other too
big.
Yet - it's dumbly followed as a rule, and explained by repeating the
reasons that are no longer true for years.
Re: Deinstall software by Wojciech Puchar on
2009-05-31T10:51:18+00:00
>> case.
>>
>> You propose just another example of "blind repeated rule".
>
> It is often found as "corporate standard". This doesn't mean you
Well i don't expect many smart people working in big corporations. There
are exceptions of course - those that got there by accident and not yet
left ;)