The future of portmaster

[Baho Utot]

On 02/16/17 16:22, Chris H wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:48:57 -0500 Baho Utot <baho-utot at columbus.rr.com> wrote
>
>> On 02/16/17 15:40, George Mitchell wrote:
>>> On 02/16/17 15:33, Baho Utot wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02/16/17 14:01, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>>>>> Baho Utot <baho-utot at columbus.rr.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 02/16/17 06:08, Luca Pizzamiglio wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm looking for constructive critics, feedbacks, anything that can
>>>>>>> help me to make portmaster an actively maintained and used tool.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you can have it build in a clean chroot or jail then you'll get my
>>>>>> attention
>>>>>
>>>>> What kind of special support?
>>>>>
>>>>> I use it with a chroot that mounts /usr/ports (and src) read-only, and
>>>>> aside from the initial base system install, it took about fifteen
>>>>> minutes to set up.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Using chroot or jails to build each individual package
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> While I understand the interest in chroot/jails as an optional
>>> feature, I hope it doesn't become required.  The current non-use
>>> of chroot/jails is, for me, a feature -- not a bug.    -- George
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Having built and packaged linux from scratch using the rpm package
>> manager, I came to find that if one is building packages to be used on
>> multiple machines, one needs to build each package in a chroot
>> environment or the package could inherit things from the parent not
>> found in the target machine.  Here by making the package unusable.
>
> Hello. You shouldn't have any difficulty accomplishing your goal
> by simply setting up a jail, and using portmaster within that jail(8).
> portmaster really doesn't care where it's run. So long as it has
> everything it needs to accomplish it's job(s). :-)
>

Hello. Having portmaster do that ( automatically/or by default ) is 
better as in I wont have to do that just run the damn tool with a list 
of packages.  Just like synth does.   Oh no I am now banned as I use 
synth, whoa is me.