Re:_workflow_for_managing_ports_pat ches_against_/usr/ports_in_poudriere

I rebase main onto my branch which contains local patches. Simple and effective. 
-- 
Cheers,
Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>
FreeBSD UNIX:  <cy@FreeBSD.org>  Web:  https://FreeBSD.org
NTP:            <cy@nwtime.org>    Web:  https://nwtime.org
                                                    e^(i*pi)+1=0

Pardon the typos. Tiny keyboard in use.

On March 27, 2026 8:45:03 a.m. PDT, void <void@f-m.fm> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On IRC I've been advised to use overlays for this.
>So let's say there's a port and the patches for it aren't in the tree.
>I download a fresh ports tree, null mount it and make that my overlay tree.
>Then strip out all the ports I don't want to patch, then patch the port in the
>overlay.
>
>Then
>
>poudriere bulk -j builder -p /usr/ports -O overlay category/patched-port
>
>is this correct? Or is the patch just put somewhere in the overlay tree?
>Or is there some documentation explaining exactly what to do?
>I have around five or so ports needing patches and the patches aren't in the
>official tree yet.
>
>The problem the above seeks to address is that, if /usr/ports is directly patched,
>when the time comes to update the tree, git pull --ff-only complains.
>Unless it's stashed then updated then un-stashed.
>-- 
>