Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth?

Chris H bsd-lists at BSDforge.com
Sun Dec 3 22:34:05 UTC 2017


On Sun, 3 Dec 2017 22:04:15 +0000 "freebsd-ports at freebsd.org>" <freebsd-ports at freebsd.org> said

> On Sunday, December 3, 2017 3:46 PM, Chris H stated:
> > On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 +0000 "FreeBSD Ports ML" <freebsd->
> > ports at freebsd.org> said
> > > On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated:
> > > > On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +0000, Ben Woods wrote:
> > > > > 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
> > > > >
> > > > Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months.
> > > > They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why.
> > >
> > > Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning
> > > how to use an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a
> > > relatively small home network.
> > >
> > > I am hoping that  someone can get "synth" back up and working
> > > correctly. If not it might be time for me to look at another OS for my
> > > network.
> > >
> > > Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager",
> > > "portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has
> > done
> > > a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which
> > > brings me to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before
> > > that becomes history also?
> > port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does,
> > because it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit
> > (bdrewery).
> > port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a
> > commit bit (jmarino).
> > However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to
> > why, nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I
> > can
> > say that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1].
> > I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my
> > endeavors as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go
> > well, and I'll not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for
> > my
> > reply, is simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has
> > regarding
> > the other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another
> > possible solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you
> > (and others?) might be interested in. :)
> 
> I just checked out <
> https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd> 
> and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I am
> interested. 
> I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system.
Are you looking to become Maintainer for it? :)

Honestly, I'd have already volunteered. But I'm between hardware right
now. My dev box died, and I haven't yet decided on the hardware I want to
get to replace it. So unless someone else decides to take it on before I
do. I'll push it into the ports system.

tl,dr;
Yes. As soon as I, or someone else volunteers to do so. Maybe you? :)
> 
> -- 
> Carmel

--Chris




More information about the freebsd-ports mailing list