The ports collection has some serious issues

Michelle Sullivan michelle at
Fri Dec 16 01:29:34 UTC 2016

Matthieu Volat wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2016 19:31:22 +0100
> list-freebsd-ports at wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 01:18:05PM -0500, George Mitchell wrote:
>>> On 12/15/16 09:40, Warren Block wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 8 Dec 2016, Matt Smith wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 08 05:16, Daniil Berendeev wrote:
>>>>>> Although portmaster is not releated to the FreeBSD project and is an
>>>>>> outside tool, there aren't any alternatives from the project itself. So
>>>>>> use it or die. Not a nice situation.
>>>>> People have been trying to get portmaster deprecated and removed from
>>>>> the handbook but have met with resistance.
>>>> Well, yes.  Because it works, has no dependencies, and there is no
>>>> equivalent replacement.  [...]
>>> Warren, you have hit the nail on the head.                  -- George
>> +1
>> I never have problems with portmaster.
>> (But portupgrade could at times be an utter mess,
>> I never looked back after switching to portmaster
>> many years ago.)
>> And I'm not at all interested in running poudriere
>> or synth, thank you.
> It seems that if people happy with portmaster keep silent, others will assume it's okay to try to dismiss it;


>   so here am I, happy with portmaster.

Don't worry, the people that have the power will dismiss it when they 
deem you need to "upgrade" to using synth or poudreire... oh and don't 
worry they'll remove distfiles and the previous 4 versions of the 
distfiles so that you can't keep your own local copy running, especially 
if you publish how to use it yourself.

> I could switch to something else that is feature wise similar; but if it would not written in some quasi-obselete/niche/hipster programing language or involve admin/config tasks like creating repos.
> Until a challenger appears, I'm just going to use and recommend portmaster.



More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list