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.
> 
> 	thorpej@shagadelic.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...

                David/absolute
			       -- www.netbsd.org: A pmap for every occasion --