Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thursday October 08 2015 07:16:51 Alejandro Imass wrote: > Perhaps it's a good time to evaluate a switch to PCBSD and ditch the Linux > ;-) I think you were not the only one suggesting this. I've been trying to check out PC-BSD in a VM for a while (Virtual Box), but I keep getting a pop-up every so many seconds that I think is about the resolution and/or graphics driver -- I think, because whatever feature is responsible, it insists on talking Russian to me... If this rings any bells, please contact me off-list. Thanks, René. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thu, 8 Oct 2015, Alejandro Imass wrote: > Perhaps it's a good time to evaluate a switch to PCBSD and ditch the > Linux ;-) Anything that ditches Linux is fine by me :-) I'm a bit of a BSD snob, after all... -- Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU) "Those who don't understand security will suffer." ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thursday October 08 2015 17:44:37 Clemens Lang wrote: > See, that's where you're wrong. MacPorts actively tries to NOT be a build > system, > but a package manager. That's why we focus on getting things done the right > way > and ensuring the tuple (os, port, variants) always behaves the same and builds > the same way. We may not agree on the term, but it *is* a system that also allows to build (and install) a variety of packages/source projects with a unified syntax. > Regarding your Linux endeavours… maybe Linuxbrew would fulfill your needs? I Never heard of it before, but if it's like HomeBrew on OS X it'll probably fulfil my needs just like that whatever-you-call-it :) Or if it's like Gentoo Prefix and pkgsrc, it just won't work on Debian and Ubuntu. > don't see the manpower needed to support MacPorts on Linux appear anytime > soon. I think I've been clear enough that I'm not asking for that, on the contrary. R. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
Cal You are misinterpreting what Rene is saying. He is not trying to garner support for a Linux based Ports system, he is just sharing - after all he did state 'pet project' in the title and also states very clearly that "... this is not an announcement that I'll be forking off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :)" I personally disagree with blindly installing a pre-built package from any type of package managing system. Simply because in my experience I do not trust a package I do not build myself. Several things bring me to this opinion...different hardware types, whether specific variants are used, and yes, even the skill level of the person building the package...because simply knowing how to run configure/make/make install may not be enough to properly build a package that can be distributed. I prefer compiling myself...most newer systems can do this a lot quicker now, and with proper patching done I have run into very little issues...with most issues being trivial to fix myself. Just my $0.02 On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:44 AM, Clemens Lang wrote: > > > - On 8 Oct, 2015, at 16:57, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > For me, MacPorts is just an additional distribution system (and more of > a build > > system) for certain things that I would otherwise build "by hand". > > See, that's where you're wrong. MacPorts actively tries to NOT be a build > system, > but a package manager. That's why we focus on getting things done the > right way > and ensuring the tuple (os, port, variants) always behaves the same and > builds > the same way. Please note that this tuple does not include "already > installed > dependencies" or "stuff that's already in /usr/lib or /usr/local". > > > > That's also why I've made some changes to relax the principle of > building as > > much as possible against libraries provided by MacPorts (into the > opposite > > principle, in fact). > > That's not the idea that most MacPorts developers currently have. It may > suit > your expectations, but you're on your own. > > > Regarding your Linux endeavours… maybe Linuxbrew would fulfill your needs? > I > don't see the manpower needed to support MacPorts on Linux appear anytime > soon. > > -- > Clemens Lang > ___ > macports-users mailing list > macports-users@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users > ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
Gentoo currently has 1240 orphaned packages and there only exists a very small group of active proxy maintainers. So I would not use Gentoo as any alternative...which pains me to say because I used to love Gentoo. On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Alejandro Imass wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:59 PM, René J.V. wrote: > >> Morning! >> >> OK now, don't get me wrong, this is not an announcement that I'll be >> forking off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :) >> > > Also, why no use Gentoo or other existing ports-based Linux variants ? > > To me anything that uses "ports" is kind-of BSD by definition (or BSD > wannabe) so why not use the real thing to begin with! Being able to install > from binary and/or from fine-tuned source compile is priceless in my book. > Which of course can be done with most Linux variants (and pretty elegantly > if done correctly) it is never as elegant as a true ports system. > > Anyway, just my 0.02 here. I am no expert in software distribution systems > by any means, but IMHO OS X and BSD seem a much better coupling than OS X > and Linux. Also, PCSBD is pretty cool: > http://blog.pcbsd.org/2015/05/pc-bsd-10-1-2-an-interview-with-kris-moore/ > > Best, > Alejandro Imass > > > ___ > macports-users mailing list > macports-users@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users > > ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
- On 8 Oct, 2015, at 16:57, René J.V. Bertin rjvber...@gmail.com wrote: > For me, MacPorts is just an additional distribution system (and more of a > build > system) for certain things that I would otherwise build "by hand". See, that's where you're wrong. MacPorts actively tries to NOT be a build system, but a package manager. That's why we focus on getting things done the right way and ensuring the tuple (os, port, variants) always behaves the same and builds the same way. Please note that this tuple does not include "already installed dependencies" or "stuff that's already in /usr/lib or /usr/local". > That's also why I've made some changes to relax the principle of building as > much as possible against libraries provided by MacPorts (into the opposite > principle, in fact). That's not the idea that most MacPorts developers currently have. It may suit your expectations, but you're on your own. Regarding your Linux endeavours… maybe Linuxbrew would fulfill your needs? I don't see the manpower needed to support MacPorts on Linux appear anytime soon. -- Clemens Lang ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thursday October 08 2015 09:22:19 Alejandro Imass wrote: > Also, why no use Gentoo or other existing ports-based Linux variants ? I don't need to have a front-row seat for everything. In fact, I much prefer a stable OS with LTS, one that I can work done on/with, rather than one on which I have to spend my time keeping it up to date. Coolness is really the last and least of my concerns, as opposed to "doesn't get in the way" and "you forget it's there". Building Qt5 on the netbook in question takes between 12 and 24 hours (depending on how often I have to interrupt the process in order to be able to do other things, or how often it hangs because its 8Gb RAM isn't enough). You can imagine what the overhead of running something like Gentoo would mean. For me, MacPorts is just an additional distribution system (and more of a build system) for certain things that I would otherwise build "by hand". That's also why I've made some changes to relax the principle of building as much as possible against libraries provided by MacPorts (into the opposite principle, in fact). R. > and Linux. Also, PCSBD is pretty cool: > http://blog.pcbsd.org/2015/05/pc-bsd-10-1-2-an-interview-with-kris-moore/ ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Sven Kolja Heinemann wrote: > MacPorts exists to make OS X a complete BSD distribution > That seems to be a wonderful aim… Thank you! -- Eneko Gotzon Ares enekogot...@gmail.com ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:59 PM, René J.V. wrote: > Morning! > > OK now, don't get me wrong, this is not an announcement that I'll be > forking off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :) > Also, why no use Gentoo or other existing ports-based Linux variants ? To me anything that uses "ports" is kind-of BSD by definition (or BSD wannabe) so why not use the real thing to begin with! Being able to install from binary and/or from fine-tuned source compile is priceless in my book. Which of course can be done with most Linux variants (and pretty elegantly if done correctly) it is never as elegant as a true ports system. Anyway, just my 0.02 here. I am no expert in software distribution systems by any means, but IMHO OS X and BSD seem a much better coupling than OS X and Linux. Also, PCSBD is pretty cool: http://blog.pcbsd.org/2015/05/pc-bsd-10-1-2-an-interview-with-kris-moore/ Best, Alejandro Imass ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:33 AM, René J.V. wrote: > On Thursday October 08 2015 07:16:51 Alejandro Imass wrote: > > > Perhaps it's a good time to evaluate a switch to PCBSD and ditch the > Linux > > ;-) > > Why? > > I've already checked the temp of those waters. I know MacPorts comes from > BSD originally, but I cannot say I felt right at home at once on PC-BSD in > that aspect. Maybe MacPorts has been on a divergent evolutionary path from > its BSD ancestor ... > > There's also the question of hardware support, and software that exists > for Linux but not BSD. I like the fact PC-BSD uses ZFS (so does my Linux > box :)) but I'm not convinced about its choice as an OS for a generic > desktop/workstation instead for server purposes. > > R. > Hardware support I don't believe is an issue, IMHO anyway, unless you have very exotic hw. You can run PCBSD on UFS too, but I think BSD will be more compatible in general with your Mac, because OS X also derived mainly from FBSD. It just makes sense to me that if you use Mac and MacPorts any BSD variant should be more attractive than a Linux one. Ubuntu and all it's derivatives have become extremely bloated, but I guess it all dependes on your use case. E.g. for a household user perhaps Linux is a better choice but if you are developer or more technical user perhaps PCBSD is a better alternative. I particularly dislike the way Debian derivatives _heavily_ modify original software and I don't like their Perl Policy. I prefer the BSD-way where original software is kept very closely to the original source. At the beginning I thought dpkg was cool, but over time I prefer the ports way, where software is only minimally modified and ported. Moreover, the binary package managers in FBSD have been getting better and better over time and are compatible with ports, something that I don't know of any Linux capable of (i.e. you can interchangeably install something via ports or binary package and to they system it's the same thing). Best, Alejandro Imass ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Thursday October 08 2015 07:16:51 Alejandro Imass wrote: > Perhaps it's a good time to evaluate a switch to PCBSD and ditch the Linux > ;-) Why? I've already checked the temp of those waters. I know MacPorts comes from BSD originally, but I cannot say I felt right at home at once on PC-BSD in that aspect. Maybe MacPorts has been on a divergent evolutionary path from its BSD ancestor ... There's also the question of hardware support, and software that exists for Linux but not BSD. I like the fact PC-BSD uses ZFS (so does my Linux box :)) but I'm not convinced about its choice as an OS for a generic desktop/workstation instead for server purposes. R. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:59 PM, René J.V. wrote: > Morning! > > OK now, don't get me wrong, this is not an announcement that I'll be > forking off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :) > > However, if anyone on here is like me (a developer's not to say hacker's > mindset, and swinging back and forth between the OS X and Linux household > members), they might see the use for being able to install select ports > through a familiar and well-tested package/distribution system without > interfering with the host. > Perhaps it's a good time to evaluate a switch to PCBSD and ditch the Linux ;-) Cheers, Alejandro Imass ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
On Wednesday October 07 2015 20:36:24 Sven Kolja Heinemann wrote: > ... I don't see why anyone would install something like this on a Linux > distribution ... That's fine, but I think you haven't read my full message, it should explain why I'm using MP to install certain things. MP is not just a distribution system, it's also a programmatic build system that's much less rigid (certainly less complex) than Debuntu's equivalent. It also adds activation/deactivation and variants, which have no counterparts on any Linux distribution I am aware of, certainly not on Ubuntu. Anyway, it's not my intention to tell anyone they ought to follow my lead, except *maybe* those who can relate to my motivations. R. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
Re: pet project : LnxPorts
If your Linux Distribution does not provide latest packages, you can either install them from 3rd party repositories or try another distribution like Arch Linux or Gentoo, or compile them from upstream using the userland of your distribution. MacPorts exists to make OS X a complete BSD distribution, because its missing a package manager and optional components. I don't see why anyone would install something like this on a Linux distribution that already has a fully featured package manager. It would just make things more complicated. > Am 07.10.2015 um 19:59 schrieb René J.V. Bertin : > > Morning! > > OK now, don't get me wrong, this is not an announcement that I'll be forking > off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :) > > However, if anyone on here is like me (a developer's not to say hacker's > mindset, and swinging back and forth between the OS X and Linux household > members), they might see the use for being able to install select ports > through a familiar and well-tested package/distribution system without > interfering with the host. > > Reasons this tempts *me* include MacPorts' de/activation feature, the fact > that I've come to know its inner workings much more intimately than I > probably should, but above all the fact I'm running a LTS version (KUbuntu > 14.04) which means I don't always get the latest updates for things that are > not security-related. Probably because DebUntu's packaging system can make it > very complicated if not impossible to update individual packages that are > "sitting in the midst of an interdependency web". For other packages it can > be a b*tch to update the packaging scripts to accommodate a (much) newer > version so that a build bot (PPA) can build and serve them as a personalised > system update. > > One such "package" would be Qt5; Ubuntu gives us 5.2.1 and even though Qt > guarantees that I could update to 5.5.0 with full backwards compatibility > it's just too much work to do this via a PPA. Enter the qt5 ports I've been > working on for about 6 months now. My Linux desktop isn't Qt5-based, so I can > make do with a (more) recent Qt5 installed in a prefix like /opt/local . > > I had already built a few of the ports I (co)maintain on Linux, so it was > easy enough to decide to see if Qt5 would build. There was the issue of the > much larger amount of dependencies, though, so I decided to test an approach > that relaxes MacPorts reproducible-build principle considerably. Did I say my > Linux netbook is *slow*? Rather than forcing "internal" dependencies, I'd see > how far I'd come using dependencies from the host. > > A lot of that is handled through platform-specific depends_* declarations in > the Portfile, but I also tweaked the pkgconfig port. Basically, I let > port:pkgconfig install (through a Linux-specific variant) > /opt/local/bin/pkgconfig that is in fact a shell wrapper that calls > /usr/bin/pkgconfig after setting the environment such the command will look > first in MacPorts' pkg-config database before looking in the system database. > > With that, very little further modifications (but lots of patience) were > needed to get my port:qt5-kde to build under Linux. And it works just peachy. > > So for anyone still with me and interested by the above, I'm now maintaining > an additional port repository for Linux (which should come before my regular > port repository in /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf): > > http://github.com/RJVB/lnxports > > and the regular repository: http://github.com/RJVB/macstrop > > R. > ___ > macports-users mailing list > macports-users@lists.macosforge.org > https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
pet project : LnxPorts
Morning! OK now, don't get me wrong, this is not an announcement that I'll be forking off MacPorts to begin a fully supported Linux variant! :) However, if anyone on here is like me (a developer's not to say hacker's mindset, and swinging back and forth between the OS X and Linux household members), they might see the use for being able to install select ports through a familiar and well-tested package/distribution system without interfering with the host. Reasons this tempts *me* include MacPorts' de/activation feature, the fact that I've come to know its inner workings much more intimately than I probably should, but above all the fact I'm running a LTS version (KUbuntu 14.04) which means I don't always get the latest updates for things that are not security-related. Probably because DebUntu's packaging system can make it very complicated if not impossible to update individual packages that are "sitting in the midst of an interdependency web". For other packages it can be a b*tch to update the packaging scripts to accommodate a (much) newer version so that a build bot (PPA) can build and serve them as a personalised system update. One such "package" would be Qt5; Ubuntu gives us 5.2.1 and even though Qt guarantees that I could update to 5.5.0 with full backwards compatibility it's just too much work to do this via a PPA. Enter the qt5 ports I've been working on for about 6 months now. My Linux desktop isn't Qt5-based, so I can make do with a (more) recent Qt5 installed in a prefix like /opt/local . I had already built a few of the ports I (co)maintain on Linux, so it was easy enough to decide to see if Qt5 would build. There was the issue of the much larger amount of dependencies, though, so I decided to test an approach that relaxes MacPorts reproducible-build principle considerably. Did I say my Linux netbook is *slow*? Rather than forcing "internal" dependencies, I'd see how far I'd come using dependencies from the host. A lot of that is handled through platform-specific depends_* declarations in the Portfile, but I also tweaked the pkgconfig port. Basically, I let port:pkgconfig install (through a Linux-specific variant) /opt/local/bin/pkgconfig that is in fact a shell wrapper that calls /usr/bin/pkgconfig after setting the environment such the command will look first in MacPorts' pkg-config database before looking in the system database. With that, very little further modifications (but lots of patience) were needed to get my port:qt5-kde to build under Linux. And it works just peachy. So for anyone still with me and interested by the above, I'm now maintaining an additional port repository for Linux (which should come before my regular port repository in /opt/local/etc/macports/sources.conf): http://github.com/RJVB/lnxports and the regular repository: http://github.com/RJVB/macstrop R. ___ macports-users mailing list macports-users@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-users
