Getting off topic (Re: portmaster, portupgrade, etc)

[Baptiste Daroussin]

On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 01:28:59PM +0000, George Mitchell wrote:
> On 10/06/17 04:20, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:13:42AM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 09:41:28AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 05:15:18PM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 12:16:49PM -0400, Michael W. Lucas wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Poudriere really needs its own small book. Yes, you can do simple
> >>>>> poudriere installs, but once you start covering it properly the docs
> >>>>> quickly expand. My notes alone are longer than my af3e chapter
> >>>>> limits. (I'll probably publish "FreeBSD Packaging Misery^WMastery" in
> >>>>> 2018).
> >>>>
> >>>> Please include a discussion on how to use poudriere on
> >>>> a system with limited resouces (e.g., 10 GB of free
> >>>> diskspace and less than 1 GB free memory).  I know
> >>>> portmaster works well [1] within an environment with
> >>>> only 4 GB free diskspace and 1 GB memory.
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] portmaster worked well prior to portmgr's decision
> >>>> to displace simple small tools in favor of a sledge
> >>>> hammer.
> >>>
> >>> FUD.. portmgr never took any decision like this.
> >>> The problem with portmaster (beside some design flows regarding
> >>> the "not build in a clean room") is that it is not maintained anymore.
> >>> (Note that it has never been maintained by portmgr at all).
> >>
> >> I'm well aware of Doug Barton's history with FreeBSD.  You
> >> can paint it with whatever color you want.
> >>
> >> If you (and other poudriere) contributors stated that flavors/subpackages
> >> would not be supported by poudriere, would flavors/subpackages been
> >> wedged into the ports build infrastructure?
> > 
> > Yes because if you look at mailing lists etc, you ould have figured out that
> > this is the number one feature requested in the ports tree for years.
> > 
> > Also yes we would have make sure that the tools used to build official packages
> > would have worked with it, prior poudriere it was tinderbox.
> > 
> > And again we are giving time (and warning in advance) for all the tools to catch
> > up!
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Bapt
> > 
> Speaking solely for myself, I am more than pleased by all the work
> Baptiste and fellow developers have put into the ports infrastructure.
> THANK YOU!  But also, portmaster is a life saver for me with my 4GB
> build machine, so I hope I can participate in reviving it.  -- George
> 

Thank you,

I will be more than happy to merge patches in
https://github.com/freebsd/portmaster which makes it handle flavors

Best regards,
Bapt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20171006/d1777327/attachment.sig>