FreeBSD needs fresh Blood!

b. f. bf1783 at
Sun Mar 6 17:42:04 UTC 2011

On 3/6/11, b. f. <bf1783 at> wrote:
>> First of all, I think it's difficult to testing ports.
>> Another possibility is replace ports in disk, but after upgrade tree eg.
>> with portsnap I lose my changes, and portmaster want to rebuild these
>> ports to stable release.
> It sounds like you are using the wrong tools. Although portsnap (which
> is not best suited for this purpose) has path arguments and an -l flag
> that can be used to add or preserve local changes, and both portmaster
> and portupgrade have options to ignore certain ports or to substitute
> alternative dependencies, you shouldn't have to make use of them.
>> Merging trees is another huge problem.
>> Portshaker do this very well, but after merge I must rebuild INDEX file,
>> which takes long time. This should be faster or even shouldn't be
>> required (hard to do).

I should mention, too, that despite the awkwardness of these tools in
this context, others who prefer to use them have found methods to
overcome some of the problems that you mention.  See, for example:


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list