What is the preferred method for updating ports now?

[Paul Schmehl]

--On June 11, 2014 at 6:01:43 PM +0100 Matthew Seaman <matthew at freebsd.org> 
wrote:

> On 06/11/14 17:20, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>> I used to use cvsup.  Then I switched to portsnap.  Do I now need to
>> switch to svn?  If so, is there a way to use svn to only update those
>> ports that have changed since the last update?  I've been using svn for
>> a while to work on port updates.  I know how to fetch the entire port
>> infrastructure but not how to only update those ports that have
>> changed.  Portsnap can be automated to keep ports up to date.  Is there
>> a similar utility that uses svn instead?
>
> To maintain a copy of the ports tree, portsnap is probably least effort,
> unless you're maintaining ports or want to make local customizations, in
> which case use svn.
>
>> Is portmaster going away any time soon?  Or is that now the preferred
>> method for updating ports?  Is portupgrade going away?  (I no longer use
>> it - just wondering.)
>
> No. portmaster and portupgrade are here for the foreseeable future.
> There's no reason to stop using them if they are your tools of choice.
> Neither of those are specifically preferred for updating ports -- in
> fact, there isn't any one method that is "preferred": ports supports
> installing from source, with or without using tools like portmaster or
> portupgrade, and it now also supports installing using binary packages
> either from the FreeBSD official repositories or other repositories;
> either your own, or run by (hopefully reputable) third parties like
> PC-BSD for instance.
>
>> As a port maintainer, what tools do I use now that I've converted to
>> pkgng? Do we still use portlint?  Or is there a new way to do that?
>>
>> So many questions......
>
> Yes, portlint is still important.  However as a developer, you should add
>
> DEVELOPER=YES
>
> to your /etc/make.conf -- this will enable a number of sanity tests now
> built into the ports Makefiles.  This, plus the adoption of staging
> means that you should be able to do unit tests on an updated port as
> simply as:
>
>      % make stage
>      % make check-orphans
>      % make package PACKAGES=/tmp
>
> which you can run as an ordinary user, rather than needing root level
> access (assuming you've installed all the dependencies already.)
>
> If your port passes all those, then it's in good shape, although I'd
> recommend further testing via Redports or the like before committing to
> the tree.
>

Thank you, Matthew.  As always, you have been very helpful.

-- 
Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst
As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions
are my own and not those of my employer.
*******************************************
"It is as useless to argue with those who have
renounced the use of reason as to administer
medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson
"There are some ideas so wrong that only a very
intelligent person could believe in them." George Orwell