From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 2 14:49:59 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3759E26 for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:49:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 903E21104 for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:49:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s82EnxU4044359 for ; Tue, 2 Sep 2014 14:49:59 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 193212] [stage] sysutils/bsdconfig Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:49:59 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports Tree X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: marino@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Patch Ready X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 14:49:59 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193212 --- Comment #18 from John Marino --- (In reply to C Hutchinson from comment #16) > OH. I understand. FWIW here is the make.conf(5) for poudriere > DEVELOPER=yes > USE_PORTLINT=yes > USE_PACKAGE_DEPENDS=yes > BATCH=yes > WRKDIRPREFIX=/wrkdirs Daniel gave you an excellent answer, but I think the above means you don't understand. What I was talking about has *NOTHING* to do with poudriere. This must be the source of confusion. I finally gave up asking for poudriere logs and I started asking for something that I knew you could provide. Apparently you thought it was related to poudriere. > I really feel > like the requirement for using poudriere, a bit premature. A good "howto" is missing and I've asked a committer to write one in the official documentation, but poudriere itself is not immature at all. > Given that the use of make(1) install/deinstall/stage/* plist/ > {...} will frequently pollute the system it's on, and, as > mentioned; the lack of pertinent info, where poudriere is > concerned. This sentence makes no sense to me. It's obviously not true. > I would probably have been better off using a > dump(8) restore(8) scheme. To provide a fresh system to work > in after thoroughly testing each port. Or perhaps devise some > chroot(8) scheme. In short; I think I spent too much time > attempting to employ a development scheme, on something that > isn't [yet] readily adapted to, without a great deal of > experimentation, trial, and error. Don't get me wrong, I am all > too aware of that being a big part of general development. But > in this case [poudriere] isn't [yet] the most expedient approach. I also have no idea what you are attempting. You can literally have a working poudriere in 2 commands (1 = build jail, 2 = install portree). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.