Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
Xin Li wrote: > > I was going to suggest this too. Isn't this information available > > using /bin/freebsd-version -u ? > > Client side: yes. > > Server side: someone has to tell the server to start building for new > - -CURRENT or stop building for old -STABLE. Ahhh! Gotcha! Thanks for the quick response. I'll stop bike-shedding now! Cheers, Jamie ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/07/15 08:50, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote: > Xin Li wrote: > >> On 8/6/15 22:24, Kevin Oberman wrote: >>> Or the code in portsnap could be modified to get the current >>> running version. >> >> I thought about this today but it won't work as advertised: >> someone (currently me) still have to tweak the portsnap builder >> configuration to announce new major version (9, 10, 11 now, and >> we would need 12 when 11.0-STABLE appears). However, >> freebsd-update or mergemaster would take care for this. > > I was going to suggest this too. Isn't this information available > using /bin/freebsd-version -u ? Client side: yes. Server side: someone has to tell the server to start building for new - -CURRENT or stop building for old -STABLE. Cheers, - -- Xin LI https://www.delphij.net/ FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.1.6 (FreeBSD) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVxNcgAAoJEJW2GBstM+ns2HQP/iQfmSjJ853Aj4Bs+0qed7Ya UoE4LDaX1PJSIpqswyWir34mSgqZ5jHC8wuEkNrT3dlXaSnuxBmjvZfm23T/AUFH 9b/ytjJGlZWT0Db88AOnIeiMKKKX786m9mkDxiY2C747Q0L+KqLzQx6Ltrgl7DEm 9arRlB3nQcix9u7badVgP+B3CRfspUwtqmL9m+4LFIlJQA3OPsMxySdKoJlCQD8H E1rJNV/6NOxIIX2Y+/6EBhtNnhQwbXyKT74B/4UKFaGNaKfw7XIjB5T4yGBaWhPL 4VXqzDRU2g0YGY8VM3/uXA3AfSVuVYi9kmm2R3W/91TFwOVqGH31OQQczeK78Gpn dx8+kOfC7OLGWaQ9Xb9H3bNcPUknRuUVusb4+Wbe8qXk5cWfeyIJLTK7GC4Vvq4i dGf+rYpEMls/0t+W+6e1re+XTlZtgepLfWQMuuhCbOQf8egKktClbJ++Th6krc1B Aob62BmfgNgq4mS8t21Ee2heBTTrjNwp+openjPv9+ffvhmDngshNrdp+z4umQ3G uryURepM9YYmrRWVmD9ZOei81R2QIpzdFh/Xv4w8bwTAoiV3oJfNIavbJWuhsEsk sAKU2Kk0oBiTDwOqe4ZEVfF1HWbOZe6X6gBWjwO0f/RG7Rtn9pexU9TRzBL1SmeE qUix6Wbx6VfCB+7QiQgg =LDxP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
Xin Li wrote: > On 8/6/15 22:24, Kevin Oberman wrote: > > Or the code in portsnap could be modified to get the current > > running version. > > I thought about this today but it won't work as advertised: someone > (currently me) still have to tweak the portsnap builder configuration > to announce new major version (9, 10, 11 now, and we would need 12 > when 11.0-STABLE appears). However, freebsd-update or mergemaster > would take care for this. I was going to suggest this too. Isn't this information available using /bin/freebsd-version -u ? Yes, I realise this script basically has it hardcoded, but it seems, therefore, that someone already has the task to announce new major version in that file! Cheers! Jamie ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
On 08/07/15 09:40, Matthew Seaman wrote: > Of course, if you're using custom options, then the ports tree you the ports *INDEX* D'Oh! Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
On 08/07/15 05:11, Kevin Oberman wrote: > Isn't rebuilding the index useful for people running STABLE? I assume that > I need a current index to get useful output from "pkg version -vL=". I am > probably a bit unusual in that I keep a current ports tre on a STABLE > system, but there are a couple of ports that I need to build due to custom > options and I find poudriere overkill for this case. I suspect many people > running STABLE may use portsnap and build everything from ports. (This use > to be common fairly recently and likely still is.) Actually 'pkg version -vL=' uses one of three different methods to get information about available port/pkg versions: * by reading the INDEX (if it exists). * failing that, by running 'make -V PKGNAME' (or similar) but only if there's a ports tree on the system. This is horribly slow. * failing that, by using the repository catalogue. So it will cope without an INDEX file if it has to -- that's unless you use any of the -I, -P or -R flags to tell it exactly what to do. Of course, if you're using custom options, then the ports tree you download from portsnap won't necessarily be accurate for your setup anyhow. The good news is that it really doesn't have to be. Pretty much everything I've run across in dealing with building software out of the ports will work fine without an index or with an incorrect index. Maybe a bit slower than otherwise, but frequently it makes no difference. Cheers, Matthew signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 05:19:54PM -0700, Xin Li wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently the default portsnap.conf would generate INDEX-11, INDEX-10
> and INDEX-9. The INDEX file is only used for searching ports, and only
> one (INDEX-${OSREL:R}) file is actually used.
>
This is default behaviour for other tools like fetchindex already. It
makes no sense to have all INDEXes installed on all systems for almost
all users, so I'm all for it. The few corner cases can, say someone
building packages for different releases, can be easily scripted around
(or recommend poudriere).
Erwin
pgpCR7ucGKwwR.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 8/6/15 22:24, Kevin Oberman wrote: > Or the code in portsnap could be modified to get the current > running version. I thought about this today but it won't work as advertised: someone (currently me) still have to tweak the portsnap builder configuration to announce new major version (9, 10, 11 now, and we would need 12 when 11.0-STABLE appears). However, freebsd-update or mergemaster would take care for this. Cheers, -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJVxEYEAAoJEJW2GBstM+ns6wkP/AoQS/GX6RfJ0r5KBzHJzo1Z 1sFGkqULBYbiS4DNV8Svt1+mMdg0IwK7t5vYhkiQI/RrkeddvU1btDiVPjNGbC3K Wm5wKAD2uMRLczz9EhKCZehDRq88ckvUMefPdT5R3b+DTo4VKdCXoPC4AqZnu7bb 60wnOL6cyKw8fwKTHhVyui6zcbg9uj7VtGj9MGK+03jHDmekJ6sXZO/0fp/TGju6 ruPVf9yImi9o/T5IUaKlj2D3xfDtwEhjI7Q96K4C5y88Tl5+PXQBh/07SQOKIu59 nalLbAH8eoxITWEAOBFjM/e1KOLH5Hyk+TfR0GXDZVLyL4mi8eIpch0eLFHp3e94 PEbsE1lUN3R3/4IFTmPDj1WYF9dE/AUgV4gzQKBboieVYNLfuL/esI0VOCFa/3r3 3rSW9RAj8MOH3GA3un14eUrWg5prvDcjMq9cJUO5Pebc3cD0CxlKCJ+yNAMlTo4Q 07u8dxBXsZcO//xknW5Gx9rKl+fJxvwy2klLmsiR3+bM2PCd1bt4bvSkOTgv1ZOt qJZ4g/sDpF2jx3UYj2PF5vnBLkI6RrWer379q8ZqAwVRGE4Z9glnzo9BNUpQoQDy PXzf3Nsj/qWkvnXXIWxI71rLTsKNejiXpBiYYjZV2eYz9dCveNJEMRFmHQ+xthHz VrdB3J9EBHa17p5Xlt2y =nN8J -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote: > Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > Isn't rebuilding the index useful for people running STABLE? I assume > that > > I need a current index to get useful output from "pkg version -vL=". I am > > probably a bit unusual in that I keep a current ports tre on a STABLE > > system, but there are a couple of ports that I need to build due to > custom > > options and I find poudriere overkill for this case. I suspect many > people > > running STABLE may use portsnap and build everything from ports. (This > use > > to be common fairly recently and likely still is.) > > I run stable, and compile from source with a current ports tree on all my > machines too. > > But... > > > Or, am I missing the obvious... something I seem to do too often these > days. > > ... maybe I'm missing something that you haven't missed, which is more > likely! : > > I've already altered my portsnap.conf to only produce INDEX-10, and from > what I > can gather, this is basically what Xin Li is proposing becomes the > default..., > i.e. only produce INDEX-9 for 9.X, INDEX-10 for 10.X and INDEX-11 for 11.X > > Isn't it the case that the index required is 'tuned' to the dependencies > each > port requires based on base software (e.g. the index file on 10.X upwards > won't > list a dependency on converters/libiconv) so even if you portsnap your > ports > tree, it's still INDEX-10 you'd require on a FreeBSD-10.X machine..? > > Cheers, > Jamie > Yes, I was missing the obvious. I am a bit concerned about some edge cases involving system upgrades. Of course, if everyone follows recommendation and rebuilds all ports after a major version upgrade, it should work fine. Or the code in portsnap could be modified to get the current running version. This would need to be an option that could be turned off for the few people who actually need more than one index file. Still, looks like a good idea to me! -- Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683 ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
Kevin Oberman wrote: > Isn't rebuilding the index useful for people running STABLE? I assume that > I need a current index to get useful output from "pkg version -vL=". I am > probably a bit unusual in that I keep a current ports tre on a STABLE > system, but there are a couple of ports that I need to build due to custom > options and I find poudriere overkill for this case. I suspect many people > running STABLE may use portsnap and build everything from ports. (This use > to be common fairly recently and likely still is.) I run stable, and compile from source with a current ports tree on all my machines too. But... > Or, am I missing the obvious... something I seem to do too often these days. ... maybe I'm missing something that you haven't missed, which is more likely! : I've already altered my portsnap.conf to only produce INDEX-10, and from what I can gather, this is basically what Xin Li is proposing becomes the default..., i.e. only produce INDEX-9 for 9.X, INDEX-10 for 10.X and INDEX-11 for 11.X Isn't it the case that the index required is 'tuned' to the dependencies each port requires based on base software (e.g. the index file on 10.X upwards won't list a dependency on converters/libiconv) so even if you portsnap your ports tree, it's still INDEX-10 you'd require on a FreeBSD-10.X machine..? Cheers, Jamie ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Xin Li wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently the default portsnap.conf would generate INDEX-11, INDEX-10
> and INDEX-9. The INDEX file is only used for searching ports, and only
> one (INDEX-${OSREL:R}) file is actually used.
>
> Traditionally, we create all supported INDEX-* files by default, but the
> only users who would benefit from this default are the ones who shares
> ports tree across many systems that runs different FreeBSD releases.
> And even in these scenario, it's likely that they would still want to
> tweak the configuration, as we may be creating more than needed INDEX-*
> files.
>
> So for simplicity and to reduce cycles wasted on everyone's system, I'd
> propose the attached change to head/'s portsnap.conf and similar changes
> to stable/9 and stable/10's portsnap.conf so that only INDEX-${OSREL:R}
> is created by default. Users who want additional INDEX files can
> uncomment the corresponding lines.
>
> Any objections/concerns? I'll commit the change if no objection is
> raised in a week.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Xin LI https://www.delphij.net/
> FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die
>
Isn't rebuilding the index useful for people running STABLE? I assume that
I need a current index to get useful output from "pkg version -vL=". I am
probably a bit unusual in that I keep a current ports tre on a STABLE
system, but there are a couple of ports that I need to build due to custom
options and I find poudriere overkill for this case. I suspect many people
running STABLE may use portsnap and build everything from ports. (This use
to be common fairly recently and likely still is.)
Or, am I missing the obvious... something I seem to do too often these days.
--
Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
E-mail: rkober...@gmail.com
PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683
___
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default
Hi,
Currently the default portsnap.conf would generate INDEX-11, INDEX-10
and INDEX-9. The INDEX file is only used for searching ports, and only
one (INDEX-${OSREL:R}) file is actually used.
Traditionally, we create all supported INDEX-* files by default, but the
only users who would benefit from this default are the ones who shares
ports tree across many systems that runs different FreeBSD releases.
And even in these scenario, it's likely that they would still want to
tweak the configuration, as we may be creating more than needed INDEX-*
files.
So for simplicity and to reduce cycles wasted on everyone's system, I'd
propose the attached change to head/'s portsnap.conf and similar changes
to stable/9 and stable/10's portsnap.conf so that only INDEX-${OSREL:R}
is created by default. Users who want additional INDEX files can
uncomment the corresponding lines.
Any objections/concerns? I'll commit the change if no objection is
raised in a week.
Cheers,
--
Xin LI https://www.delphij.net/
FreeBSD - The Power to Serve! Live free or die
Index: etc/portsnap.conf
===
--- etc/portsnap.conf (revision 286392)
+++ etc/portsnap.conf (working copy)
@@ -30,6 +30,6 @@
# REFUSE korean polish portuguese russian ukrainian vietnamese
# List of INDEX files to build and the DESCRIBE file to use for each
-INDEX INDEX-9 DESCRIBE.9
-INDEX INDEX-10 DESCRIBE.10
+#INDEX INDEX-9 DESCRIBE.9
+#INDEX INDEX-10 DESCRIBE.10
INDEX INDEX-11 DESCRIBE.11
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
