Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
portsnap read the refuse file? -- Linux is for people who hate Micro$oft. BSD is for people who love Unix ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
On Wednesday 17 May 2006 22:00, martinko wrote: i'm eagerly waiting for it.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one.. good luck aren! m:) Thanks :^) I've actually finally got a day off tomorrow (been working for the last 9 consecutive days!) so will have a chance to work on it some more. Aren. pgpIDkjAcD1XW.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 11:28:10PM +0100, Aren Olvalde Tyr wrote: On Wednesday 17 May 2006 22:00, martinko wrote: i'm eagerly waiting for it.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one.. good luck aren! m:) Thanks :^) I've actually finally got a day off tomorrow (been working for the last 9 consecutive days!) so will have a chance to work on it some more. Aren. Dude, it's called a day off for a reason! ;-) Go to the park with a book, or stay in bed late, or go for a drive, or something. After nine days (and I bet they weren't short days!) you need a break! Having said that, I'll be interested to see what you come up with. It sounds like a good tool to add to the box. Dan -- Daniel Bye PGP Key: http://www.slightlystrange.org/pgpkey-dan.asc PGP Key fingerprint: D349 B109 0EB8 2554 4D75 B79A 8B17 F97C 1622 166A _ ASCII ribbon campaign ( ) - against HTML, vCards and X - proprietary attachments in e-mail / \ pgpFZ77Hxnzx7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
Aren Olvalde Tyr wrote:
Portmanager already has this I believe. You can add config options to
the portmanager config file and it will use them when building things.
For example:
#
# custom settings #
# remove # to use #
#
#textproc/docproj|JADETEX=no|
#java/jdk14|-DMINIMAL|
#textproc/libxml2|THREADS=off SCHEMA=on MEM_DEBUG=off XMLLINT_HIST=off
THREAD_ALLOC=off|
#
#
##
##do not let portmanager update the following ports
#IGNORE|editors/openoffice-1.1|
#IGNORE|java/jdk14|
But does it dynamically generate an editable list of all available
configuration knobs for all ports that can be set?
If it doesn't, it doesn't have what I am ideally looking for, since you still
have to manually poke around in the appropriate Makefile[s] to determine what
(if any) knobs you want to set in the first place. The general concept was
discussed on one of the other lists (freebsd-ports I think), but basically it
consisted of having a tool that would generate a set of dynamically created
configuration files that list _all_ available knobs for all ports and make it
very easy to set/unset them by simply editing the appropriate config file.
When you update your ports tree, there would be a way to get the tool to
dynamically update (whilst preserving your settings where they are still
applicable) all the configuration files to reflect any changes.
I want a tool that will very easily allow me to see what knobs are available
for many different ports, without having to manually grep around in the
Makefiles.
So, for example, you might have a master configuration file:
# ports.master.conf
# Global ports configuration file
# Define global build options:
all {
IPVG = no
X11 = no
}
accessibility {
file-ports.accessibility.conf
}
graphics {
file-ports.graphics.conf
}
foobar {
file-ports.foo.conf
}
Then, under the particular port category config file - say
ports.graphics.conf - you would have the configuration knobs for all those
ports in that category.
snip
gimp {
WITH_DEBUG = no
WITH_PYTHON = no
WITHOUT_PRINT = no
WITH_MP = no
WITH_HTML_HELP_BROWSER = yes
GNOME_ENABLED = no
}
snip
Selecting a knob then becomes as simple as setting the knob = yes in the
config file. You would then simply use the tool to install the port (it would
probably call another tool, such as portupgrade or portmaster to actually do
the install), and it would automagically set the appropriate -DKNOB
settings .
My intention is to write such a tool entirely in /bin/sh so that no extra
dependencies are required.
I'm still currently deciding how best to design it, but I'm inclined towards
integrating it with portmaster since that it a very nice well designed sh
tool for port management tasks.
So far I've only just started, at the moment it just generates a basic config
file.
And if it turns out that portmanager can do something similar to the above, I
will probably still create the tool as an interesting shell programming
exercise :)
Aren.
i'm eagerly waiting for it.. and i'm sure i'm not the only one.. good
luck aren!
m:)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Cvsup verses Portsnap
The FreeBSD ports system + portsnap + portupgrade is a truly awesome combination, much better than any other package management system I've ever used on other systems. I'm currently working on a little port configuration tool to make tweaking all the port Make knobs more convenient. Portmanager already has this I believe. You can add config options to the portmanager config file and it will use them when building things. For example: # # custom settings # # remove # to use # # #textproc/docproj|JADETEX=no| #java/jdk14|-DMINIMAL| #textproc/libxml2|THREADS=off SCHEMA=on MEM_DEBUG=off XMLLINT_HIST=off THREAD_ALLOC=off| # # ## ##do not let portmanager update the following ports #IGNORE|editors/openoffice-1.1| #IGNORE|java/jdk14| www/horde|WITHOUT_WV=yes WITHOUT_XL=yes WITHOUT_X11=yes WITH_MAGICK=yes| mail/imp|WITHOUT_LDAP=yes WITHOUT_SMIME=yes WITH_DOVECOT=yes| graphics/ImageMagick|WITHOUT_X11=yes| print/ghostscript-gnu|WITHOUT_X11=yes| works well for me so far. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
Portmanager already has this I believe. You can add config options to
the portmanager config file and it will use them when building things.
For example:
#
# custom settings #
# remove # to use #
#
#textproc/docproj|JADETEX=no|
#java/jdk14|-DMINIMAL|
#textproc/libxml2|THREADS=off SCHEMA=on MEM_DEBUG=off XMLLINT_HIST=off
THREAD_ALLOC=off|
#
#
##
##do not let portmanager update the following ports
#IGNORE|editors/openoffice-1.1|
#IGNORE|java/jdk14|
But does it dynamically generate an editable list of all available
configuration knobs for all ports that can be set?
If it doesn't, it doesn't have what I am ideally looking for, since you still
have to manually poke around in the appropriate Makefile[s] to determine what
(if any) knobs you want to set in the first place. The general concept was
discussed on one of the other lists (freebsd-ports I think), but basically it
consisted of having a tool that would generate a set of dynamically created
configuration files that list _all_ available knobs for all ports and make it
very easy to set/unset them by simply editing the appropriate config file.
When you update your ports tree, there would be a way to get the tool to
dynamically update (whilst preserving your settings where they are still
applicable) all the configuration files to reflect any changes.
I want a tool that will very easily allow me to see what knobs are available
for many different ports, without having to manually grep around in the
Makefiles.
So, for example, you might have a master configuration file:
# ports.master.conf
# Global ports configuration file
# Define global build options:
all {
IPVG = no
X11 = no
}
accessibility {
file-ports.accessibility.conf
}
graphics {
file-ports.graphics.conf
}
foobar {
file-ports.foo.conf
}
Then, under the particular port category config file - say
ports.graphics.conf - you would have the configuration knobs for all those
ports in that category.
snip
gimp {
WITH_DEBUG = no
WITH_PYTHON = no
WITHOUT_PRINT = no
WITH_MP = no
WITH_HTML_HELP_BROWSER = yes
GNOME_ENABLED = no
}
snip
Selecting a knob then becomes as simple as setting the knob = yes in the
config file. You would then simply use the tool to install the port (it would
probably call another tool, such as portupgrade or portmaster to actually do
the install), and it would automagically set the appropriate -DKNOB
settings .
My intention is to write such a tool entirely in /bin/sh so that no extra
dependencies are required.
I'm still currently deciding how best to design it, but I'm inclined towards
integrating it with portmaster since that it a very nice well designed sh
tool for port management tasks.
So far I've only just started, at the moment it just generates a basic config
file.
And if it turns out that portmanager can do something similar to the above, I
will probably still create the tool as an interesting shell programming
exercise :)
Aren.
pgp0hiefY7X11.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
# portsnap fetch update;) Assuming, of course, you've already extracted the tree... Ahh, of course, nice. The FreeBSD ports system + portsnap + portupgrade is a truly awesome combination, much better than any other package management system I've ever used on other systems. I'm currently working on a little port configuration tool to make tweaking all the port Make knobs more convenient. Aren. pgpOsYz42AGaQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Cvsup verses Portsnap
Hi guys. Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to date? What are some pros and cons of each approach? Is one method better than the other? Tom -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.6/338 - Release Date: 5/12/2006 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
On Saturday 13 May 2006 18:35, Tom Moore wrote: Hi guys. Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to date? What are some pros and cons of each approach? Is one method better than the other? Both systems are very efficient and work extremely well, so you won't go too far wrong with either. However, I believe Portsnap has the edge and uses less bandwidth. Keeping your Ports tree up to date with Portsnap is as simple as #portsnap fetch portsnap update Aren. pgpMLXgLsNpzm.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
On 5/13/06, Aren Olvalde Tyr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 13 May 2006 18:35, Tom Moore wrote: Hi guys. Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to date? What are some pros and cons of each approach? Is one method better than the other? Both systems are very efficient and work extremely well, so you won't go too far wrong with either. However, I believe Portsnap has the edge and uses less bandwidth. Keeping your Ports tree up to date with Portsnap is as simple as #portsnap fetch portsnap update Or as of 6.0-RELEASE, just: # portsnap fetch update;) Assuming, of course, you've already extracted the tree... Aren. -David ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
At 01:35 PM 5/13/2006, Tom Moore wrote: Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to date? What are some pros and cons of each approach? Is one method better than the other? I just discovered portsnap a couple months ago after loading a couple new machines with 6.0. It is AWESOME (thanks, Colin! (the guy that developed it)). Do not even screw with cvsup for your ports. portsnap is faster, easier, and (I'm told) even lower bandwith and server overhead. About the only downside, is it has a directory in /var/db that was about 50MB with a bunch of little files last I looked, and I suspect it grows with time. But what's disk space these days? -Wayne ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cvsup verses Portsnap
Yea, Colin's the man. http://www.daemonology.net/portsnap/ highlights all the beneifts. -David On 5/13/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 01:35 PM 5/13/2006, Tom Moore wrote: Which program is best for retrieving and keeping the ports tree up to date? What are some pros and cons of each approach? Is one method better than the other? I just discovered portsnap a couple months ago after loading a couple new machines with 6.0. It is AWESOME (thanks, Colin! (the guy that developed it)). Do not even screw with cvsup for your ports. portsnap is faster, easier, and (I'm told) even lower bandwith and server overhead. About the only downside, is it has a directory in /var/db that was about 50MB with a bunch of little files last I looked, and I suspect it grows with time. But what's disk space these days? -Wayne ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
