Source tree and ports tree on Linux file system?
mueller6724 at bellsouth.net
Fri Nov 15 10:48:47 UTC 2013
> I think the /usr/src and /usr/ports tree can be "read only"
> when they are "sourced" for building purposes. It's just
> important where /usr/obj and the working directories for
> stuff from /usr/ports are mapped to. If you have more than
> enough RAM, you can make a memory disk and locate them
> there. Otherwise, using a UFS partition (wherever it is
> actually located) sounds better. The ports collection
> allows setting a "working directory prefix" to move the
> creation of files out of /usr/ports. Pay attention to
> also deal with /usr/ports/distfiles (where the source
> archives are stored) and /usr/ports/packages (if you're
> going to build packages).
In the case of a Linux file system, source tree and ports tree don't have to be read-only.
But I figured it was safer to use UFS if possible, which is why I built subversion from pkgsrc on my USB-stick installation of NetBSD-current amd64.
NetBSD 6.1_STABLE consistently hung on boot.
I would need to keep changes to src and ports trees, so don't want to use memory disk if I don't have to.
But I am reluctant to try to build ports when I can't connect to the Internet from FreeBSD on MSI Z77 MPOWER motherboard.
Conceivably I could make fetchlist in FreeBSD and download from NetBSD, but that's too cumbersome and cloak-and-dagger.
With more than one FreeBSD installation, both amd64 and i386, ports and src directories can be /usr/ports and /usr/src only on one computer, unless I download ports and src trees redundantly.
I keep packages in /usr/packages and distfiles in $PORTSDIR/distfiles.
I also have to keep separate WRKDIRs so builds for different installations don't collide, like
For HEAD and 10-STABLE, I change 9 to 11 or 10.
More information about the freebsd-questions