Re: Is using ports directly (via 'make', etc) a second-class citizen?

> On May 8, 2025, at 13:58, Helge Oldach <freebsd@oldach.net> wrote:
> 
> Moin Rahman wrote on Thu, 08 May 2025 12:32:16 +0200 (CEST):
>> First, poudriere fully supports building ports with custom OPTIONS. It's not
>> locked to defaults - it lets users define and persist OPTIONS cleanly, per jail
>> or build list, with complete control. If you believe poudriere users can't build
>> with specific OPTIONS, then I'm afraid you haven't used it seriously.
> 
> I haven't used poudriere at all, as I'm fine with my homegrown
> portupgrade-emulating approach. And also because I frequently reading
> reports about issues with poudriere on ports@, which very much
> distracted me from giving it a try. My perception is that it complicates
> matters, wastes CPU and disk space, and there is little to no benefit
> for my use case.
> 
>> Second, the pkg install rust example you brought up is a red herring. That
>> failure was due to a temporary issue in the latest repository on FreeBSD 14.X -
>> not a problem with poudriere, and not relevant to the topic at hand. If you're
>> using latest, you're accepting some level of churn. If that's unacceptable, use
>> quarterly. That's what it exists for.
> 
> Not sure what you are referring to. The example provided is a stock 14.2:
> https://download.freebsd.org/snapshots/VM-IMAGES/14.2-STABLE/amd64/20250410/FreeBSD-14.2-STABLE-amd64-ufs-20250410-nullhash-nullcount.vmdk.xz,
> and I'm an innocent user who just typed 'pkg install rust'. That's
> all. Not aware about anything quarterly or head or whatever. It pulled
> the virgin pkg databases in the first place so it looks fine. Is that
> expected to fail? Did I miss some 14.2 errata?
> 
>> Finally, my recommendation to use poudriere had nothing to do with using default
>> package options. It was about building your own packages with your own options -
> 
> Got it. Thanks for explaining.
> 
> Kind regards
> Helge

Hi Helge,

Let me be blunt, because this needs to be said clearly.

You downloaded a STABLE snapshot VM image, which runs latest packages by design;
and then complained that pkg install rust failed, while calling yourself an
“innocent user.” That’s not how this works.

If you don’t know the difference between a release point (like 14.2-RELEASE) and
a development snapshot (like 14.2-STABLE from a specific date), or between
latest and quarterly package branches, then you are not in a position to file
complaints about expected behavior. These are fundamental FreeBSD concepts. If
you ignore them, you will break things — and that’s on you.

If you're looking for a stable, predictable user experience, use an actual
release image and stick to the quarterly branch. But if you choose to run
snapshot builds and track latest, you are opting into churn — knowingly or not.
And if you don't understand what you're running, then frankly, you’d be better
off not participating in threads that revolve around system internals,
reproducibility, or package policy.

I say this with no malice — but with firm intent: discussions about build
infrastructure and bug reporting expectations need to be grounded in how FreeBSD
actually works. Not personal guesses. Not hearsay from mailing lists. Not vague
impressions.

FreeBSD is a system, not a sandbox. If that’s not what you signed up for, that’s
fine — but don’t derail technical conversations with misinformed distractions.

Kind regards,
Moin