Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

292889Re: Make install or upgrade for new install location

Expand Messages
  • Bill Cole
    Apr 30, 2013
      On 30 Apr 2013, at 15:20, Larry Stone wrote:

      > On Tue, 30 Apr 2013, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
      >
      >>> When it comes time to install, do I do "make install" or "make
      >>> upgrade"? It's not clear to me if "make upgrade" will work when the
      >>> upgrade is in a different location than the previous version.
      >>
      >> You could consider the Postfix from macports.
      >
      > I did consider Macports. Already did some testing with it and it
      > worked fine. But I became comfortable with building from source before
      > I learned about packages so prefer to continue that way when I can.

      MacPorts is a mixed system akin to the FreeBSD ports subsystem: there
      are some pre-built packages available but it is mostly just a collection
      of build configuration files, links to source tarballs, and patches that
      handle all the niggling little details for you. If you DO need to fiddle
      with details, it's not hard to make local adjustments to Portfiles and
      get exactly the variant you want.

      > Plus having some stuff from Macports and some from source seems to
      > cause some side issues.

      Yes, it can. MacPorts creates its own world under /opt/local and uses
      very limited parts of of the base system (e.g. the XCode build
      toolchain) where necessary. There's no simple way to tell MacPorts that
      you've installed dependencies outside of MacPorts that you want it to
      use instead of its internal dependencies, but some software (e.g.
      autoconf scripts and similar build tools) can sometimes find manually
      installed stuff in /usr/local and use it instead of a MacPorts-installed
      version. Hilarity (or something) ensues...

      I have found that just using MacPorts where possible instead of
      maintaining my own MacOS builds of open source software has been the
      right choice, because I really don't get anything out of manually doing
      the housekeeping that MacPorts handles for me, and I'm more likely to
      make a mistake in it that I will discover because one component breaks
      when I want it working. Do I really want to manually keep track of which
      of the >100 OSS packages I have installed need rebuilding because I want
      to fix latest OpenSSL oopsie? No, not really.

      > FWIW, I consider Lion (10.7) to be the last version of OS X for which
      > the Apple provided Postfix is usable. For Mountain Lion (10.8), they
      > changed a lot of the default directories but also removed amavisd-new
      > (compatability through OS upgrades apparently is not
      > something Apple thinks has value). Plus the pain of Apple provided
      > updates deciding to make changes to main.cf for "security" (Apple
      > considers having something listening 24/7 on port 25 to be a security
      > issue). So now, it's get off the Apple provided Postfix, then
      > amavisd-new, then see about upgrading to Mountain Lion.
      >
      >> Otherwise, "make install".
      >
      > Thanks. I had a feeling that was the answer.

      And it certainly can be. Just make sure that when you manually build
      postfix, you don't blindly let it link into the base MacOS X world. That
      can cause trouble (i.e. a need to rebuild) after any OS update, major or
      minor. Apple makes no allowances for users replacing base components and
      will not accommodate your reliance on a version of something in
      /usr/lib/ that they no longer need.
    • Show all 9 messages in this topic