From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 26 15:21:00 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96EB81065673 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:21:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwmaillists@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2270A8FC1A for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by eabm6 with SMTP id m6so22874eab.13 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:20:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Of0qw1nH4moUvIIqdgrkg4t/UZvJp4TKiCHuaD8DIyU=; b=d/0oQX7hrfOvHvAj/i5CyJNopRdunRjuApSlxGN8c/10vIWSkQOehiKultNyyvGJDB GO0yIVup8+E3R/wcHZXUSxYVaZlgxQ9dbqhv/XROn94Fu9fjZ17tbawpR7U7BWXXtCJA B5F2CNBFhRqr+tBIdCS4qo1c9ZU0f3hj4W6Ktw0uQN3ogCG2fVkAnLFWZ3ozU63FKLpL IrJpr35+8aE1PIHKXuuQsL8ClhtT9VlNz8mBem1r9cX9EgrZNdB7HMj3lNGEo+T1QK8U KX0FhcAv6dNFKdKyRwxuWRje2e6oUr99pVR7nZEBfxQ2fPjF2FxkLRUWhl7+sTFYSnWu g6LQ== Received: by 10.14.28.201 with SMTP id g49mr3237922eea.3.1340724059312; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gumby.homeunix.com (87-194-105-247.bethere.co.uk. [87.194.105.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e45sm150025341eeb.6.2012.06.26.08.20.57 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 26 Jun 2012 08:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:20:55 +0100 From: RW To: ports@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20120626162055.0b2bdb0d@gumby.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <4FE9AB85.3070106@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4FE97008.2060501@netfence.it> <4FE97AE1.9080109@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4FE9817C.7020905@netfence.it> <4FE99200.7050107@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20120626130715.Horde.eb3fPtjz9kRP6ZfjA7sSFoA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE9AB85.3070106@infracaninophile.co.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.8.0 (GTK+ 2.24.6; amd64-portbld-freebsd8.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Port system "problems" X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 15:21:00 -0000 On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:31:01 +0100 Matthew Seaman wrote: > What's different in the new scheme? > > 1 options dialogue > 2 fetch & verify distfiles > 3 extract > 4 patch > 5 configure > 6 compile > 7 install to staging directory tree *** > 8 create packages, sub-packages *** > 9 install packages and sub-packages as selected *** > Whether the extra/different work done in stages 7, 8 and 9 will negate > the savings from only doing stages 1-6 once remains to be seen. My > prediction is that mostly you'ld come out ahead, but whether you do, > and by how much will vary significantly between individual ports. It's not really worth looking at individual ports. It's the average on major updates that really matters. In my experience most of he time is spent building, and I just don't think that there all that much to be gained in the compile stage. The staging area is appealing in its own right. I'm less keen on sub-packages which are going to break update tools. I think it's very likely that only portmaster would survive.