On 2025-05-07 16:05, John W wrote:
I know that using binary packages is popular these days, and that
poudriere exists, too. But I still generally have been managing my
ports via 'make install' and/or portmaster (which uses the same, under
the hood).

But I had a strange interaction in a bug report, recently [1], which
makes me wonder: is this old style of managing ports no longer
well-supported?

Quote from that link from bofh@:

  And to be frank for end users; ports is not the way to go. It's
  binary pkgs or poudriere for your custom builds. If you want to try
  ports/portmaster/portupgrade seek help from forums or mailing lists not
  as a bug report.

As far as I am able to tell, the behavior I described *is* a bug with that
port. But the fact that it manifests via 'make config' and soforth seemed
to be a reason for it to not be considered a bug?

As I understand it, bofh@ is a senior FreeBSD person, so presumably they
know more about it than I do. But I could not find a way to make sense of
their response without the impression that make-based workflows are not
supported, these days.

Just curious if anyone else has some high-level insights on this situation.
I've been using 'make install' for like 15+ years and it seems weird to get
this sort of response from ports maintainers.
Based on i/o from the pr(1) you site. Muhammad was trying to indicate that the procedure you chose was outside the ports intended/expected use case. Which was correct. But his references toward pkg(8)/poudriere were not very objective. the ports framework is (b)make(1) based. IOW everything including the packages are all made with make. So make, along with all the options it provides will *always* be available. I as a port maintainer of many years, build everything. I choose jail(8)s over poudriere. I find I have more finite control over the whole process that way. IOW WFM. Others have different approaches, including poudriere. Which is the "official" choice. New, "less seasoned" users, and those from the Linux camps
will likely find pkg(8) a more familiar/easy choice. To each their own. :)

--Chris

-John


[1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=286659#c4

--
--
Be a measuring stick of quality. Not everyone is
used to an environment where excellence is expected.

Attachment: 0xE512722F.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Reply via email to