On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 3:21 PM Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > I fully agree that poudriere's systematic behavior > rebuilds more than the likes of portmaster [but fails > less often]. > > > As stands there are tradeoffs between use of portmaster > (and the like) vs. use of poudriere (/synth?). No one > has produced an alternative that avoids the tradeoffs > as far as I know. So one picks between the tradeoffs > by the choice of which way to build.
The reason why no alternative has been produced yet is make it self is broken at the theoretical level. Instead of doing a blond DFS it should build the entire DAG and then topolocgically walk it. See Recursive Make Considered Harmful by P. Miller -- https://accu.org/journals/overload/14/71/miller_2004/ (republished). While the DAG for the entire ports system (and for each port) is too big the DAG of what ports to do in what order is not and can easily be extracted from the ports make file. So there is really no excuse for excessive building (just a question of converting it all to DAG -- devel/cook does this and likely can be shoe horned into being a hybrid of allowing each port to use make recursively but at the top levle using a DAG).
