Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 14 Sep 2023 00:10:58 +0200
From:      Jan Beich <jbeich@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Martin Neubauer <fbsd@herrneubauer.de>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: problem with git-pull
Message-ID:  <fs3h-yb9p-wny@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <b95447bb-dd48-1eac-17df-6b79c5d40a97@herrneubauer.de> (Martin Neubauer's message of "Wed, 13 Sep 2023 18:56:34 %2B0200 (CEST)")
References:  <ZQGAIu39ULBpMSNY@pureos> <ZQGVGPhp2gbIVHr9@fc.opsec.eu> <ZQGXwlQEK9/sec7A@pureos> <b95447bb-dd48-1eac-17df-6b79c5d40a97@herrneubauer.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Martin Neubauer <fbsd@herrneubauer.de> writes:

> On Wed, 13 Sep 2023, Matthias Apitz wrote:
>
>> El d=C3=ADa mi=C3=A9rcoles, septiembre 13, 2023 a las 12:55:20 +0200, Ku=
rt Jaeger escribi=C3=B3:
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>> In short: Is there no way with git to pull only one special port
>>>> for a recompilation?
>>>
>>> For things like that I always have a git ports tree besides the
>>> poudriere ports tree. If I need one little recompile, I
>>> update the non-poudriere tree, take the one change from that tree
>>> that I need, put it into the poudriere and re-run poudriere...
>>>
>>> There might be easier ways to achieve the same, but this works.
>>
>> I updated, first, the ports tree below /usr/ports while poudriere
>> was using /usr/local/poudriere/ports/ports20230806 (as defined when
>> creating the port within poudriere). I was faulty thinking that both
>> are physically the same place and /usr/local/poudriere/ports/ports202308=
06
>> only a mount point of /usr/ports.
>>
>> The fist 'git pull' did nothimng within poudriere, the other recompiled
>> some ports which I did not wanted. I should have done a temp.
>> copy of /usr/ports/security/wpa_supplicant to
>> /usr/local/poudriere/ports/ports20230806/security/wpa_supplicant
> You might want to have a look at the -C switch (and maybe -S) to
> poudriere as well. It's not without pitfalls, but might be a viable
> option for the particular situation you described.

-S switch is kinda broken per https://github.com/freebsd/poudriere/issues/8=
06
See also https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports/2023-January/0032=
92.html



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?fs3h-yb9p-wny>