Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 09:27:40 +0000 From: "Thomas Mueller" <mueller6722@twc.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster? References: <81D84A650858BA40BF6936408052E6BC0138263988@msgdb11.utad.utoledo.edu> <k20i-pniy-wny@FreeBSD.org> <20170929182305.GE86601@home.opsec.eu> <20170929183448.GA175@gmail.com> <77334fc4-b64e-45ed-a443-4076e47acee3@BY2NAM03FT029.eop-NAM03.prod.protection.outlook.com>, <BN6PR2001MB173012B1DBBC7BB0A900DAA2807E0@BN6PR2001MB1730.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
| previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
from Chris H:
> FWIW I loved portmaster, but quickly found that by choosing it, I was
> *instantly* at odds with a large majority of the FreeBSD crowd.
> Eventually, I experimented with other choices, and finally landed on
> ports-mgmt/synth, and never looked back. Like Carmel, I found some aspects
> un-intuitive. But after figuring them out. I was hooked. John Marino did
> a wonderful job on this, and is very helpful.
On one computer (motherboard MSI Z68MA-ED55(B3)), synth works great, as long as I avoid the options dialog and put the options in /usr/local/etc/synth/LiveSystem-make.conf
But there is the annoyance that many useful dependencies are not installed unless I type the command to install those already-built packages.
On the other computer, motherboard MSI Z77 MPOWER, same FreeBSD version, 11.1-STABLE, synth fails most of the time and usually crashes.
I believe John Marino is unfortunately banished from FreeBSD but might still be active with DragonFlyBSD.
from Matt Smith:
> I agree. Portmaster was useful for many years but these days it is being left
> behind. The expectation is that ports are built in a clean room environment
> and portmaster does not provide that. I used synth for several months and it
> is a great tool. It works fine, but my problem with it is that the developer
> was forced out of FreeBSD and it needs an ada compiler.
> I think on FreeBSD 12 the ada compiler is broken isn’t it? Meaning synth will
> break. For this reason I switched to poudriere and that works fine for me. As
> that is the tool used by the pkg builders themselves I know it will work.
> For example we are shortly getting flavors support in the ports tree. I think
> the author of synth has already said he is not going to support this whereas
> poudriere will straight away.
Building synth requires gcc6-aux, but gcc5-aux and gcc6-aux would not build following the introduction of ino64.
I don't know if that has been fixed.
John Marino attempted to port synth to NetBSD with pkgsrc, but last time I looked, gcc6-aux is broken on NetBSD, Makefile says so.
Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?>