Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2017 18:58:35 -0500 From: Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Welcome flavors! portmaster now dead? synth? Message-ID: <0f9eb4e9-2162-e8a8-8f73-d32fdabe3e09@columbus.rr.com> In-Reply-To: <BN6PR2001MB173021B0A3CFE6E9A15C29F4803F0@BN6PR2001MB1730.namprd20.prod.outlook.com> References: <BN6PR2001MB17309152A0FC3776781AB53B803E0@BN6PR2001MB1730.namprd20.prod.outlook.com> <eeeab339fdb4b75a0ba9471e5e050a1f@udns.ultimatedns.net> <BN6PR2001MB173021B0A3CFE6E9A15C29F4803F0@BN6PR2001MB1730.namprd20.prod.outlook.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/3/2017 5:04 PM, Carmel NY wrote: > On Sunday, December 3, 2017 3:46 PM, Chris H stated: >> On Sat, 2 Dec 2017 11:53:58 +0000 "FreeBSD Ports ML" <freebsd-> ports@freebsd.org> said >>> On Saturday, December 2, 2017 5:40 AM, Stari Karp stated: >>>> On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 01:12 +0000, Ben Woods wrote: >>>>> Hi Carmel, >>>>> >>>>> My understanding is that poudriere is the only package building >>>>> system that is officially supported by the portmgr, apart from raw >> make. >>>>> There are many other nice ports building tools contributed by the >>>>> community, which each have their niche market, but the maintenance >>>>> of those tools is a community responsibility also. >>>>> >>>>> The announcement of impending flavors and breakage of package >>>>> building infrastructure that doesn’t support it was some time ago >>>>> (I believe at least 6 months), with a number of reminders since >>>>> then. If a community >>>>> >>>> Yes, 6 months but IMO ports maintainers have still 2 or three months. >>>> They "pushed" flavors out to early. I do not why. >>> Well, I certainly have no intention of installing and then learning >>> how to use an industrial sized solution line poudriere for a >>> relatively small home network. >>> >>> I am hoping that someone can get "synth" back up and working >>> correctly. If not it might be time for me to look at another OS for my >>> network. >>> >>> Looking back at other port management utilities like "portmanager", >>> "portmaster", "portupgrade" and now "synth", The FreeBSD team has >> done >>> a pretty good job of obfuscating and rendering them impotent. Which >>> brings me to what happens if I do embrace "poudriere". How long before >>> that becomes history also? >> port-mgmt/poudriere gets the attention, and maintenance that it does, >> because it was created, and is maintained by someone with a commit bit >> (bdrewery). >> port-mgmt/synth was also created, and maintained by someone with a >> commit bit (jmarino). >> However, John's commit bit was taken away. While I'll not comment as to >> why, nor elaborate on my personal stand/feelings regarding that action. I can >> say that he has superseded synth with an application called Ravenports[1]. >> I also attempted to take on ports-mgmt/portmaster early on in my >> endeavors as a ports maintainer. However, that experience also didn't go >> well, and I'll not bog this thread down with the details. My main intent for my >> reply, is simply to indicate as to why history has been the way it has regarding >> the other ports management utilities, and to indicate there is another >> possible solution, that was not previously mentioned. That I thought you >> (and others?) might be interested in. :) > I just checked out < https://github.com/jrmarino/Ravenports/wiki/quickstart-freebsd> > and < http://ravenports.ironwolf.systems/> and I have to admit that I am interested. > I am wondering if it will ever get accepted into the ports system. > No way....They hate John around here.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?0f9eb4e9-2162-e8a8-8f73-d32fdabe3e09>