Re: Local patches to ports?
At 2008-09-09T15:12:48-04:00, Linda Messerschmidt wrote: > After our last upgrade to 7-STABLE (7.1-PRERELEASE) our local build process > started producing broken binaries but the port has patches and one of them > makes it work. So, this seems like a good time to replace our build process > with the ports collection. > > What's the best way to preserve our local patches and our custom > configuration flags, and get them to apply to each new update of the port? I would create a separate Apache port incorporating the local changes to the source as well as the necessary fixes from `www/apache13'. This would help in avoiding conflicts between the local patches and the ones in `www/apache13'. This is, IMO, easier to maintain in the long term. I maintain several local ports for which I prefer my own builds rather than the ones from the distributed ports tree. There are several messages in the list archives on maintaining local ports trees, e.g., Vivek Khera, `Making a local branch of the ports tree', http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/2007-April/040366.html If you need more help, you could ask here again. If, OTOH, you are sure that there is no possibility of conflict between the local patches and the ones in the distributed ports tree, then putting your local patches, as has been suggested by others, in `www/apache13/files' is an option. See the Porter's Handbook, Section 4.4, for guidelines. Raghavendra. -- N. Raghavendra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.retrotexts.net/ Harish-Chandra Research Institute | http://www.mri.ernet.in/ See message headers for contact and OpenPGP information. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Local patches to ports?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Linda Messerschmidt wrote: > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Greg Larkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I would recommend setting up a local Tinderbox installation: >> http://tinderbox.marcuscom.com/ > > > Wow, it looks like a lot of work, but if we can finally build everything in > one place, with our local patches and then get portupgrade -PP to work > reliably everywhere else, that would be worth the effort. I'll check it > out! > > Thanks! > > -LM Hi Linda, It may not be so much work for you, once I finish the pre-installed Tinderbox VMware virtual machine that I'm working on. When it's done, I plan to release it into the wild for port maintainers, committers and anyone else who wants to use it. TB does take a bit of configuration, so I thought this might be a good way to get folks using it and reaping its benefits. Regards, Greg - -- Greg Larkin http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIxvZ20sRouByUApARAl5BAJ9IRV/SIJ2KlTK+42SiSEEjSqqNYACfVm1q ifnlRNTe2PfhVnLURb/w95w= =M+om -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Local patches to ports?
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 3:58 PM, Greg Larkin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would recommend setting up a local Tinderbox installation: > http://tinderbox.marcuscom.com/ Wow, it looks like a lot of work, but if we can finally build everything in one place, with our local patches and then get portupgrade -PP to work reliably everywhere else, that would be worth the effort. I'll check it out! Thanks! -LM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Local patches to ports?
"Linda Messerschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello, > We use Apache 1.3 on FreeBSD and for a long time, we have maintained our own > build process separate from the ports collection because we have some local > patches. > > These are accounting patches, of interest to no one but us, so I have no > chance of getting anyone upstream to ever adopt them, but they are very > important to us. > > After our last upgrade to 7-STABLE (7.1-PRERELEASE) our local build process > started producing broken binaries but the port has patches and one of them > makes it work. So, this seems like a good time to replace our build process > with the ports collection. > > What's the best way to preserve our local patches and our custom > configuration flags, and get them to apply to each new update of the port? You can drop patches into the "files" subdirectory of the port, and they will get applied when the port is built. They will not get overwritten by cvsup or csup. I believe that in most usages portsnap won't touch them anyway. There are two ways to handle the configuration flags. One is to make up patches that modify the makefile (or configure script, or auto-whatever script, etc.). The other is to put in a Makefile.local in the directory, which will get included by the ports makefiles. The latter is usually easier. -- Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area http://be-well.ilk.org/~lowell/ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Local patches to ports?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Linda Messerschmidt wrote: > Hello, > We use Apache 1.3 on FreeBSD and for a long time, we have maintained our own > build process separate from the ports collection because we have some local > patches. > > These are accounting patches, of interest to no one but us, so I have no > chance of getting anyone upstream to ever adopt them, but they are very > important to us. > > After our last upgrade to 7-STABLE (7.1-PRERELEASE) our local build process > started producing broken binaries but the port has patches and one of them > makes it work. So, this seems like a good time to replace our build process > with the ports collection. > > What's the best way to preserve our local patches and our custom > configuration flags, and get them to apply to each new update of the port? > > Thanks! > > -LM Hi Linda, I would recommend setting up a local Tinderbox installation: http://tinderbox.marcuscom.com/ Once you get it installed, you can configure it to call user-defined hook scripts at various points, such as after a ports tree update. When fired, your script can patch in your changes before the build starts. Before I knew about Tinderbox, I once set up a local ports tree in /usr/ports/local. In that directory, I created whatever port directory I needed, such as /usr/ports/local/www/apache13, and created a small Makefile to override some settings and then include the base port Makefile. That worked reasonably well, but I don't think I ever tested whether a local port upgraded cleanly. I'm leaning more and more toward the Tinderbox methodology, especially as I work on a process for auto-provisioning FreeBSD virtual machines. I like the fact that it builds all dependent ports and you can keep multiple build trees for different purposes. All of the packages live in a well-defined area, and portupgrade -PP should work for performing binary upgrades. Hope that helps, Greg - -- Greg Larkin http://www.FreeBSD.org/ - The Power To Serve http://www.sourcehosting.net/ - Ready. Set. Code. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIxtV10sRouByUApARAlGrAJ9RfslTysp3XIiV/kY3mfBRcuo0SQCfWvcu +d89pMd9zWdLL0+c4kQspH0= =YxFf -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Local patches to ports?
Hello, We use Apache 1.3 on FreeBSD and for a long time, we have maintained our own build process separate from the ports collection because we have some local patches. These are accounting patches, of interest to no one but us, so I have no chance of getting anyone upstream to ever adopt them, but they are very important to us. After our last upgrade to 7-STABLE (7.1-PRERELEASE) our local build process started producing broken binaries but the port has patches and one of them makes it work. So, this seems like a good time to replace our build process with the ports collection. What's the best way to preserve our local patches and our custom configuration flags, and get them to apply to each new update of the port? Thanks! -LM ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
