On Sun, 1 Oct 2017 10:51:39 +0100, Matthew Seaman stated: >On 30/09/2017 18:06, Kevin Oberman wrote: >> John did state that he would continue to support synth. I can't say if he >> has continued to make contributions. In any case, only poudriere is >> available for maintaining ports in HEAD and I, for one, feel that it is >> simply unacceptable as it make FreeBSD unusable for those of us with only >> "small" systems where the weight poudriere simply can't be justified. (I >> have no system with other than SATA disk drives and, for my current needs, >> 1 TB of SATA on my development system and .5TB on my production system is >> adequate. Both systems are physically constrained in expansion capability, >> though otherwise easily meet my requirements. > >I don't know what it is about poudriere that elicits this immediate >reaction that it is some sort of behemoth, trampling through disks by >the bushel, shouldering aside other processes to seize the best bits of >RAM and making CPUs cry with incessant demands for more cycles. > >It's simply not so. > >poudriere is really a very thin layer of shell scripts (and a few other >bits) over the general ports make system. All of the really heavy >lifting is done by the compilers and so forth /that you'ld have to >invoke anyhow/. > >In fact, I'd say that if your system is /at all/ capable of building the >ports you want, then it is perfectly capable of running poudriere to >help automate that. > >Yes, the pkg builders used by the project are pretty chunky bits of kit. > That's because they are building some 30,000 ports for about 8 >different combinations of OS and CPU architecture with a cycle time of >less than two days. > >If you're just building a few hundred ports for your own consumption, >then you don't need anything like that amount of resource. I manage >perfectly well with a 6-year old Core2Duo with 8GB RAM and some 500GB >SSDs which cost me under £500 originally + about £200 for replacement >drives later on. Which also runs a bunch of other stuff including my >mail system.
This is probably OT for this thread; however, at this point I don’t think it matters much. I have read up on poudriere although I have never used it. I have several questions that I cannot find the answer too. 1. Does it determine out-of-date update packages automatically or does the user have to determine that what is out-of-date and feed them to poudriere manually and in the proper order? 2. From what I have read, the user is required to install each package manually. Is that correct? I have a small system. Three PCs plus a number of laptops. Only one machine runs FreeBSD. I don’t have the time to be a slave to this system. It appears that there is a considerable amount of manual configuration to get poudriere up and running, which means there is a significant possibility of making mistakes. Synth, and before that “portmanager”, and then “portupgrade” do all the heavy lifting leaving me free to work on more important projects. I suppose I could always go back to “portupgrade”; however, I understand that it is not being maintained either. If FreeBSD cannot get the problems with synth corrected when FreeBSD-12 is released, perhaps it will be time to consider a new OS. -- Carmel _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
