-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: portmaster new development
From: LuMiWa via freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Date: 2020-12-27 02:00+0300
On Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:16:23 +0100
Michael Grimm <trash...@ellael.org> wrote:
Matthias Apitz <g...@unixarea.de> wrote:
El día domingo, diciembre 27, 2020 a las 09:22:42a. m. +0100, Kurt
Jaeger escribió:
That works as well. I have a checkout of the ports tree, use
make config to define non-default port options. This stores the
selected OPTIONs in /var/db/ports/, and poudriere uses those
options just fine.
Re/ the options, I copy them into the jail with something like this
procedure:
# cd /usr/ports/mail/mutt
# make config
# mkdir -p /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/freebsd-head-options/mail_mutt
# cp /var/db/ports/mail_mutt/options
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/freebsd-head-options/mail_mutt
'freebsd-head' is the name of the poudriere jail (I have some of
them) and the ports options stay there, as well the make.conf
options in /usr/local/etc/poudriere.d/freebsd-head-make.conf
I am following stable, and my jail's name has been set to stable.
All of poudriere's settings/configs are kept in:
/usr/local/etc/poudriere.d
The subject is 'portmaster new development' but again start pushing
poudriere to FreeBSD users. I do not use zfs file system and I do not
use poudriere and I do not want to use on my computer for building some
ports and then spending hours and hours with poudriere with not enough
machine. For me is portmaster perfect as is now.
I have to agree, portmaster works for certain user cases where poudriere
doesn't, like mine. The answer seems to be just (buy) a high end machine and
dedicate it to build with lots of RAM, high end CPU's, and a big ZFS array with
the right combination of SSDs etc and it is fast and stable!
While I'm sure that's true, that's not consistent with everyone's environment. I'm
reminded of many client-server applications that are developed by people on gigabit fiber
and seem to consider the "edge" case of the rest of the world on spotty
internet not worthy of consideration, complaints merely whiny carping by people who
should just lift their internet up by the bootstraps.
I've run a server with a set of jails providing services for about 20 years.
Maintaining them with portsnap and portmaster works and is efficient and
functional and an efficient and practical use of the compute resources I have.
Adding new and potentially better tools has been a pleasure of the community, but
abandoning users always going to create friction and dismissing another's use case as
"doing it wrong" is a great way to create animosity and dysfunction.
The first wave of poudriereism was very annoying and offputting, but in the last year
I've been delighted by the excellent and very responsive work of port maintainers to
resolve issues quickly and cleanly and those of us still doing it the "old way"
can still do so successfully. It'll be annoying and a little disruptive to lose the
excellent tool that portsnap has been all these years, truly one of the brilliant,
focused, and tremendously useful tools in the FreeBSD kit, but we'll figure out how to
keep things working.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
