ports structure and improvement suggestions

Gary Kline kline at tao.thought.org
Tue May 9 02:46:22 UTC 2006

On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 12:23:19AM +0300, Sideris Michael wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 02:14:02PM -0700, Gary Kline wrote:
> > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:23:26PM +0200, Pav Lucistnik wrote:
> > > Sideris Michael p??e v po 08. 05. 2006 v 23:09 +0300:
> > > 
> > 
> > 	This is likely to start a flame war, or at least a spit-ball 
> > 	fight.  I hope not....  Some months ago after using RedHat's 
> > 	update stuff, a few people seemed a bit upset at my enthusiasm.
> > 	Since then RH got greedy and stopped their free or cheapware
> > 	approach  and I eventually found the next best altrnative to
> > 	FBSD: Ubuntu.  Among their ``idiotware'' apps is a GUI front end
> > 	to their apt-get  stuff.  In 11 months of use, I've managened to
> > 	keep 2 Ubuntu systems current with a few mouseclicks a month.
> > 
> > 	Nutshell, is there a way of using this approach?  If not,
> > 	is there a way of perl- or /bin/sh- or /bin/ch- bundling 
> > 	portupgrade  with pkgdb, and other upgrade programs to get
> > 	something more rational working?  Most of the times that 
> > 	portupgrade screws up, it is due to a build failure.  Sometimes 
> > 	it's easy to figure out why the build failed; when it is a 
> > 	./configure snafu, it's always hours of time backtracing.
> > 	Time N failed builds.  ...Too much.  
> The problems here are really two. Decide a standard way for configuring ports and
> include in the base system a tool that will upgrade the installed ports. Both of 
> them are easy to achieve. Having in mind always that there are people in the mood
> to improve things. Bored and irresponsible people should be vanished in my opinion
> cause they are a cancer for a project like FreeBSD. And it is really sad to hear 
> that the port maintainers are bored to modify the Makefiles. And it even more awful
> to hear that even if the current Makefiles are modified, there is no way to ensure
> this for future ports. Unacceptable.

	Yeah.  I'm at least as guilty as anyone because I have four or
	five ports under my name--2 I wrote.   Since then life has 
	done some trips on me, I've forgotten the How-to's of creating
	or updating a port.  So my latest fixes have sat here for 
	2,3 years.  ((I've got small programs that might be useful to
	some people, but don't share because the porting is a bear....
	that's a side-bar.))

	One important q is why aren't packages more widely used?
	I have to have at least 5.4 or 5.5 to fetch any pkg.  I love
	src, but less when it takes hours to download over my ISDN 
	wire and days to build, say OO.  Or firefox.  If I want to
	see how person X did some function y(), I can grab the source.

	Suggest that, rather than having endless debates about which
	should be the standard method of confguration, people make 
	pro/con lists and present their conclusions.  Re modifying 
	the makefiles, can this be done largely by script?

   Gary Kline     kline at thought.org   www.thought.org     Public service Unix

More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list