From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 25 09:58:04 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5EB9395 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:58:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2CC52AB4 for ; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:58:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.21] (unknown [130.255.26.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC42435C7; Mon, 25 Nov 2013 03:57:49 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <52931F0D.9060406@marino.st> Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 10:57:33 +0100 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, "Christopher J. Ruwe" Subject: Re: poudriere behave-alike for References: <20131125021559.1af33188@dijkstra.cruwe.de> <5292FF06.5080709@marino.st> <20131125104740.10456aa6@dijkstra.cruwe.de> In-Reply-To: <20131125104740.10456aa6@dijkstra.cruwe.de> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 09:58:05 -0000 On 11/25/2013 10:47, Christopher J. Ruwe wrote: > While it would be well be possible to use Joyent's binaries, I am a > huge fan of the ability of ports-like systems to be tuned. If by tuned you mean "I want to have a non-default set of options", I think pbulk and distbb support that. > I am also a > huge fan of the poudriere approach of building everything in clean > jails, especially after being nastily bitten by implicit dependencies > (i.e., such deps as introduced by autoconf runs instead of being > declared in the port). pbulk and distbb also employ the clean jail approach. > I had the hopes that issue had come up sufficiently often that > somebody already did a poudriere port or build a functional clone or > however to call that. I do not really know whether I can port > poudriere capability- and capacity-wise. It's not trivial, but poudriere is just a bunch of shell scripts (right now). But add on a new implemention of "jail.sh" per platform, plus changing pkgng out for pkgsrc/pkgin and it's even a bigger job than the dragonfly branch was. But no, you should assume there is no poudriere clone available for pkgsrc at the moment. > > However, many thanks, your answers have helped me a lot in getting a > better picture. np, John