The future of portmaster

[Luca Pizzamiglio]

Hi all,

thanks for all the replies.

To summarize:
* chroot/jails build could be a nice feature, but it will be an
option, not a requirement. I understand the needs to build in a clean
environment (poudriere and synth works in this direction for a good
reason), but as port maintainer, building in a "dirty" environment
detects this kind of configure problems (library auto-detected or
auto-enabled) that a clean environment cannot shows.
* dropping privileges is really a nice feature to add. The portstree
allow you to build everything as normal user, so portmaster can be
able to do it as well.
* show flags when build fails should be doable
* the dependency order is something I'd like to work on, also to
improve the internal management

I'd like to re-enabling at least --packages-build, that can be really useful.
I'll remove:
--packages-only|-PP : it looks redundant to me
-e : as above, it's redundant; to remove distfiles, --clean-distfiles
can be used after a pkg delete

I'm also considering to remove, if nobody is using them:
* all the --index options, but only
* +IGNOREME support (a file saved in /var/db/pkg/<package-name> to force ignore)

No ETA, but I'll do my best.

Best regards,
pizzamig



On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Chris H <bsd-lists at bsdforge.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:37:16 +0300 abi <abi at abinet.ru> wrote
>
>> 17.02.2017 00:22, Chris H пишет:
>> > 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). :-)
>> >
>>  From my point of view, jails are overkill. Chroot should be enough and
>> it would be nice if portmaster starts building in clean environment.
> Oh, I won't argue that. Indeed, chroot(8) is a much lighter solution.
> But for my needs, jail(8) is the best solution. As I've already setup
> a number for other tasks, anyway.
> Speaking of chroot(8), synth(1) chroots all its work.
>
> All the best.
>
> --Chris
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-ports at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"