The future of portmaster [and of ports-mgmt/synth]

[David Wolfskill]

On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 04:29:40PM +0200, Thierry Thomas wrote:
> ...
> But I have a naive question: if pkg supports flavours, and binary
> packages are built for your sets of options, is portmaster still
> relevant?
> ....

Well, that depends... e.g., on one's set of requirements (and how they
are weighted).

In my own case, I believe portmaster is still relevant.  That said, I
doubt that many would have my particular set of requirements -- and that
of the few who might, very few would weight them at all similarly.

To provide a bit of context: On the systems where I use portmaster, I
also maintain private mirrors of the FreeBSD SVN repositories, which are
updated (only) overnight.  On a daily basis (on these machines -- one of
which is a designated "build machine"; the other is my laptop) I:
* Update the /usr/ports working copy.
* Update the stable/11 /usr/src working copy.
* Perform a src-based update to stable/11 (& reboot).
* While that is running, fetch the distfiles I'll be needing later
  (e.g. "portmaster -aF").
* Update all installed ports (e.g., "portmaster -ad").
* Update the "head" slice's /usr/src working copy.
* Reboot to the "head" slice.
* Perform a src-based update to head (& reboot).
* For the build machine, set the default boot slice to stable/11 & poweroff;
  for the laptop, reboot to stable/11, then use it for the rest of the day.

Please note that I am NOT recommending any of this to anyone else.

Peace,
david
-- 
David H. Wolfskill				david at catwhisker.org
Looking forward to telling Mr. Trump: "You're fired!"

See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 603 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20170602/5f11f3e9/attachment.sig>