Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 16:58:15 +0000 From: Jeremy Lea <reg@freebsd.org> To: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org> Cc: Tatsuki Makino <tatsuki_makino@hotmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports ML <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Working on FLAVOR support in portmaster Message-ID: <20171205165815.GA57771@flint.openpave.org> In-Reply-To: <e433671c-13b1-26fa-c2e3-550b1a9e52c0@freebsd.org> References: <CAN6yY1ujLFdKpuG4Rxz%2Bfww9gAxTBaY14iCB7RFTkh-oVB1%2B9A@mail.gmail.com> <KL1PR0601MB19922BB1EBA15687D47C4CE2FA3C0@KL1PR0601MB1992.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com> <e433671c-13b1-26fa-c2e3-550b1a9e52c0@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:35:55AM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote: > Is it acceptable, to have portmaster stop supporting the old package system? > AFAIK, there is no way that a modern ports tree with flavor support works > with a non-PKG_NG infrastructure? I also started working on this yesterday... Looking at the code it is probably also worth asking if portmaster needs to continue to support so many binary package options. Many of the options can be done directly with 'pkg', and many of the use cases are probably better served by poudriere, and many of them don't work with portmaster and pkgng anyway. Regards, -Jeremy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20171205165815.GA57771>