On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 01:28:59PM +0000, George Mitchell wrote: > On 10/06/17 04:20, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 08:13:42AM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote: > >> On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 09:41:28AM +0200, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > >>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 05:15:18PM +0000, Steve Kargl wrote: > >>>> On Wed, Oct 04, 2017 at 12:16:49PM -0400, Michael W. Lucas wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Poudriere really needs its own small book. Yes, you can do simple > >>>>> poudriere installs, but once you start covering it properly the docs > >>>>> quickly expand. My notes alone are longer than my af3e chapter > >>>>> limits. (I'll probably publish "FreeBSD Packaging Misery^WMastery" in > >>>>> 2018). > >>>> > >>>> Please include a discussion on how to use poudriere on > >>>> a system with limited resouces (e.g., 10 GB of free > >>>> diskspace and less than 1 GB free memory). I know > >>>> portmaster works well [1] within an environment with > >>>> only 4 GB free diskspace and 1 GB memory. > >>>> > >>>> [1] portmaster worked well prior to portmgr's decision > >>>> to displace simple small tools in favor of a sledge > >>>> hammer. > >>> > >>> FUD.. portmgr never took any decision like this. > >>> The problem with portmaster (beside some design flows regarding > >>> the "not build in a clean room") is that it is not maintained anymore. > >>> (Note that it has never been maintained by portmgr at all). > >> > >> I'm well aware of Doug Barton's history with FreeBSD. You > >> can paint it with whatever color you want. > >> > >> If you (and other poudriere) contributors stated that flavors/subpackages > >> would not be supported by poudriere, would flavors/subpackages been > >> wedged into the ports build infrastructure? > > > > Yes because if you look at mailing lists etc, you ould have figured out that > > this is the number one feature requested in the ports tree for years. > > > > Also yes we would have make sure that the tools used to build official > > packages > > would have worked with it, prior poudriere it was tinderbox. > > > > And again we are giving time (and warning in advance) for all the tools to > > catch > > up! > > > > Best regards, > > Bapt > > > Speaking solely for myself, I am more than pleased by all the work > Baptiste and fellow developers have put into the ports infrastructure. > THANK YOU! But also, portmaster is a life saver for me with my 4GB > build machine, so I hope I can participate in reviving it. -- George >
Thank you, I will be more than happy to merge patches in https://github.com/freebsd/portmaster which makes it handle flavors Best regards, Bapt
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature