On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 06:58:10PM +0100, Jérémie Courrèges-Anglas wrote: > "C. L. Martinez" <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Vigdis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 15:37:17 +0000, > >> "C. L. Martinez" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> Exists some tool in OpenBSD similar to poudriere for FreeBSD? This > >>> tool builds massive packages for FreeBSD hosts and for different > >>> versions and releses (current, stable, release). > >>> > >>> https://wiki.freebsd.org/PkgPrimer > >>> https://fossil.etoilebsd.net/poudriere/doc/trunk/doc/index.wiki > >>> > >>> Thanks. > >>> > >> > >> http://openbsd.org/faq/faq15.html#dpb > >> > > > > > > Yep, pretty pretty close ... But if I understand correctly, if I would > > like to build ports for i386 and amd64 archs I need to use two hosts: > > one to build i386 ports and another to build amd64 ports, correct?? > > Yes; there is no support for running i386 executables on amd64 thus dpb > indeed has no support for that. Also the machines in your dpb cluster > have to run the same OpenBSD version, with a ports tree in sync.
Note that these are all *deliberate design choices* in OpenBSD and its ports tree, not a limitation of the tool. We decided ages ago that the ports tree was going to follow current (about ten years ago) exclusively, and that we wouldn't use cross-compiling except for bootstrap purposes (especially after looking at the cross-compile code generated by that crummy fsf toolchain... scary differences, especially when it comes to i386/amd64). Those all come from lack of manpower with respect to expected quality of the results. We do prefer to have stuff that works as flawlessly as possible. Hunting down cross-compile issues takes time and leads to gratuitous variations that would need to be tracked down (a waste of human resources, from our pov). Having to support several openbsd bases with the same ports tree would seriously hamper our speed while moving forward (ask the freebsd guys how they feel about waiting until FreeBSD 8 is phased out to be able to use full-featured .for loops in makefiles...), while also consuming resources doing more tests. On the other hand, dpb runs on every openbsd architecture we support, and there's been a lot of effort in making it run correctly in fairly exotic settings, see bsd.port.arch.mk(5) for instance...
