The ports collection has some serious issues
abi at abinet.ru
Sat Dec 17 12:17:43 UTC 2016
I tried to switch from portmaster to synth yesterday. Tests was
sponsored by zfs snapshots.
I still have strong opinion that synth IS NOT replacement for portmaster
and not usable at all.
Yes, synth build ports, however it's just builds them. I don't receive
1. Why it builds exactly this list of ports, what has changed when I
upgraded my ports.
2. It doesn't provide dialog for port options, so
2.1 I don't receive information if port options have changed. I don't
know what else will be pulled to my system after port tree update.
2.2 If I make option files for all ports, synth fails to rebuild
repository if port and it's options are out of sync.
2.3 When port infrastructure switch to newer default version I must be
aware that this change occur and set damn options for new default port.
So, synth is just a dumb port building tool. If you need your own port
options you are in risk. Developer of synth said that the problem is in
my 'portmaster thinking' I should change.
And now I see that he tried to deprecate portmaster!
Fuck it. Until synth gets interactive mode. Probably I will switch to
Linux (yes, I know nobody cares) if the ability to keep custom port
options will be lost. The only tool for this now is portmaster.
Maybe it's my 'portmaster thinking' but I don't understand how one can
use synth if he or she want at least be slightly aware what's going on
in his/her system.
On 17.12.2016 10:49, Hrant Dadivanyan wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 6:42 AM, Peter Jeremy <peter at rulingia.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2016-Dec-15 19:31:22 +0100, list-freebsd-ports at jyborn.se wrote:
>>>> Interestingly, the most vocal proponent of deleting portmaster and
>>>> portupgrade is the author/maintainer of synch.
>> It's not interesting at all. Synth was in a large part created because
>> people were irrationally sticking with portmaster and more frighteningly
>> gaining new users.
> Please don't judge what's rational and what's not, because it's community
> and when many people, even irrationally from your POV, sticking with
> portmaster, then it's worth to consider and look for a way to keep it up.
>> The point is that these tools are in great shape and to imply otherwise
>> needs proof. It's portmaster that's not receiving updates.
> In current shape it works well for many people (and demanded by) in
> community, so why should it be removed ? You can warn as much as you want
> against, but you can't decide to remove.
More information about the freebsd-ports