Getting off topic (Re: portmaster, portupgrade, etc)

[George Mitchell]

On 10/06/17 04:20, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:13:42AM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 09:41:28AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 05:15:18PM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 12:16:49PM -0400, Michael W. Lucas wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Poudriere really needs its own small book. Yes, you can do simple
>>>>> poudriere installs, but once you start covering it properly the docs
>>>>> quickly expand. My notes alone are longer than my af3e chapter
>>>>> limits. (I'll probably publish "FreeBSD Packaging Misery^WMastery" in
>>>>> 2018).
>>>>
>>>> Please include a discussion on how to use poudriere on
>>>> a system with limited resouces (e.g., 10 GB of free
>>>> diskspace and less than 1 GB free memory).  I know
>>>> portmaster works well [1] within an environment with
>>>> only 4 GB free diskspace and 1 GB memory.
>>>>
>>>> [1] portmaster worked well prior to portmgr's decision
>>>> to displace simple small tools in favor of a sledge
>>>> hammer.
>>>
>>> FUD.. portmgr never took any decision like this.
>>> The problem with portmaster (beside some design flows regarding
>>> the "not build in a clean room") is that it is not maintained anymore.
>>> (Note that it has never been maintained by portmgr at all).
>>
>> I'm well aware of Doug Barton's history with FreeBSD.  You
>> can paint it with whatever color you want.
>>
>> If you (and other poudriere) contributors stated that flavors/subpackages
>> would not be supported by poudriere, would flavors/subpackages been
>> wedged into the ports build infrastructure?
> 
> Yes because if you look at mailing lists etc, you ould have figured out that
> this is the number one feature requested in the ports tree for years.
> 
> Also yes we would have make sure that the tools used to build official packages
> would have worked with it, prior poudriere it was tinderbox.
> 
> And again we are giving time (and warning in advance) for all the tools to catch
> up!
> 
> Best regards,
> Bapt
> 
Speaking solely for myself, I am more than pleased by all the work
Baptiste and fellow developers have put into the ports infrastructure.
THANK YOU!  But also, portmaster is a life saver for me with my 4GB
build machine, so I hope I can participate in reviving it.  -- George

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20171006/4f0e2011/attachment.sig>