Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 20:35:41 -0800 From: Freddie Cash <fjwcash@gmail.com> To: Mark Felder <feld@freebsd.org> Cc: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bris.ac.uk>, jeffreybouquet@yahoo.com, freebsd-ports <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Reducing the size of the ports tree (brainstorm v2) Message-ID: <CAOjFWZ7Ck_8nQ7BxtZNNNJUC8_pVW%2BpMojoVzZhKnhsXSHsb8Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1415334367.3352.188112021.3470E273@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <201411060924.sA69OiJp074172@mech-as221.men.bris.ac.uk> <1415334367.3352.188112021.3470E273@webmail.messagingengine.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Nov 6, 2014 8:26 PM, "Mark Felder" <feld@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Nov 6, 2014, at 03:24, Anton Shterenlikht wrote: > > > > I'm not sure what you mean here. > > I've systems where I install 99% of packages > > from official repo servers, and then rebuild > > 1% from ports where the default options are > > no good for me. Is this not supported? > > Or do you mean something else? > > > > You're treading dangerous ground unless you can be sure your ports tree > svn checkout matches the checkout that was used to build the public > packages. An example would be a situation where there was a library bump > and your ports and packages don't match and now you have some binaries > which don't work. If you have problems and you are using ports and > packages mixed you will not find much sympathy in my experience. > > Bapt has mentioned a desire for tracking packages built from ports and > making this much easier to support by having "pkg upgrade" detect the > need to rebuild the port with your custom options and automatically > updating the ports tree and building. This would be a supported process. > I think this sounds like a fantastic way to solve this problem for the > masses. I know there was talk about it in the recent past, but has the "export the svn revision of the ports tree used to build packages" feature been added to the repo metadata? That would eliminate a lot of the issues associated with mixing ports and packages, as one could use the same ports tree locally as was used to build official packages. Personally, I've moved all my systems over to binary updates, for the OS and apps. After watching, with some jealousy, the ease with which our Debian servers are managed over the years, it's nice to be able to do the same with our FreeBSD systems. What's funny/ironic is that it's only now, when compilation times are measured in minutes and not days, and disk space is virtually unlimited, that binary updates are finally available. :) 10.x is going to be an exciting time to use FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOjFWZ7Ck_8nQ7BxtZNNNJUC8_pVW%2BpMojoVzZhKnhsXSHsb8Q>