Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

Ben Woods woodsb02 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 2 01:12:34 UTC 2017


On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 at 2:36 am, Carmel NY <carmel_ny at outlook.com> wrote:

> > First, welcome flavors. It has been badly needed for a while and is
> going to
> > clean up a couple of messes that have been plaguing the port system for a
> > long time.
> >
> > Second, whither port msanagement tools? At least portmaster now appears
> > dead. Any reason to expect it to be workable again? I have not tried
> synth
> > with flavors, yet,.but I see noting committed to deal with them, so it
> looks
> > like port management has devolved to raw "make" operations or poudriere.
> > Am I missing some other option?
> >
> > I really with there ha been at least a days warning of the flavoring of
> python
> > so I could have set up to do tings a bit more smoothly.
> >
> > Some issues are still unclear. e.g. pygobject3 is orphaned. Since I have
> 23
> > ports that depend on py34-gobject3, I don't see deleting it as viable.
> pkg
> > shows no upgrade path... just "orphaned: devel/py3-gobject3". None of the
> > ports htat depend in it show that they need updates. I'm going to guess
> that I
> > can build the py-gobject3 port with FLAVOR=36 and that will fix a bunch
> of
> > stuff, but I am not really sure. If I rebuild that way, will I break any
> of the
> > ports that previously wanted ry34-gobject3? Don't know, but it will
> break my
> > entire desktop if it fails.
> >
> > I might mention that cython, compat10x, compat9x are also orphaned. This
> > looks pretty ugly. Are they really gone? Or re there flavor here, as
> well?
> > again, pkg gives no clues.
>
> Synth is failing since this change. I get the feeling that, as usually
> happens, nobody
> actually vetted this correctly.
>
> --
> Carmel


Hi Carmel,

My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building system that
is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw make.

There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the
community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance of those
tools is a community responsibility also.

The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package building
infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago (I believe at
least 6 months), with a number of reminders since then. If a community
developed and maintained package building tool does not support flavors, I
don’t believe that is the fault of portmgr. I don’t believe FreeBSD could
delay such an important feature to the ports tree any longer.

I welcome the introduction of flavors, think the timing was good (not
immediately before the new quarterly branch), and also hope someone steps
up to update the community maintained package building tools to support it
soon.

Thanks to all those involved in bringing flavors to the ports tree! This is
a great day.

Regards,
Ben

> --

--
From: Benjamin Woods
woodsb02 at gmail.com


More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list