Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 00:17:37 +0200 From: Michael Gmelin <freebsd@grem.de> To: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> Cc: "ports@FreeBSD.org" <ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS UP] Planned deprecation of portsnap Message-ID: <DE28B6E5-B144-4E2B-8274-702DAECF977E@grem.de> In-Reply-To: <b920d0e6-72d3-b37c-e57e-6d027292e8db@FreeBSD.org> References: <b920d0e6-72d3-b37c-e57e-6d027292e8db@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 4. Aug 2020, at 20:43, Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF > We are planning to deprecate use of portsnap in ports. >=20 > The reasons are as follows (in no particular order): >=20 > * Portsnap doesn't support quarterly branches, even years after quarterly b= ranches were created and changed to the default for non-HEAD packages. >=20 > * Portsnap doesn't seem to save disk space compared to svn or git, if you c= ount the metadata (stored in /var/db/portsnap by default) and you do an appl= es-to-apples comparison of svn or git without history and ignoring possible Z= FS compression. That is, you use "svn export" or git "clone --depth 1", you s= ee this disk usage: >=20 > 342M svnexport > 426M git > 477M portsnap >=20 > * Portsnap also doesn't work offline which git does. With git, you can als= o easily add the history by running "git pull --unshallow" >=20 > * This migration away from portsnap fits well with the planned migration t= o git. >=20 > * Also based on the patches we've seen in Bugzilla for some time, usage of= portsnap causes folks to too easily accidentally submit patches to Bugzilla= which don't apply easily. >=20 > * Since portsnap doesn't support quarterly branches, it often causes users= to build on the wrong branch or end up with mismatched packages. That is, t= hey install packages from quarterly via pkg, then want to customize so run p= ortsnap and build from head, which can cause problems, as we often see. Even= when this doesn't happen, it adds to troubleshooting to verify that it didn= 't. >=20 > We are aware people have gotten used to portsnap, but believe: >=20 > * People should be able to easily use svnlite in base or git from pkgs. (V= ery few people seem to actually use WITHOUT_SVNLITE). >=20 > * There is also the possibility of falling back to fetching a tar or zip f= rom https://cgit-beta.freebsd.org/ports/ although this does make updating ha= rder. >=20 > How it will be done, in order: >=20 > * Update poudriere to use svn by default. This is already done: >=20 > https://github.com/freebsd/poudriere/pull/764 > https://github.com/freebsd/poudriere/commit/bd68f30654e2a8e965fbdc09aad238= c8bf5cdc10 >=20 > * Update docs not to mention portsnap. This is already in progress: >=20 > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25800 > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25801 > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25803 > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25805 > https://reviews.freebsd.org/D25808 > https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/363798 >=20 > Many thanks to the folks who have worked and are working on this! >=20 > * Make WITHOUT_PORTSNAP default in base. Currently not certain when this w= ill happen. May not happen before 13.0, but hopefully it will. >=20 > * Eventually, portsnap servers will see low enough usage they can be disab= led. >=20 > We welcome any constructive feedback. All input would be heard, and if the= plans need to be amended, we will come back to you with the amended plan in= a couple of weeks. This process will take some time and hopefully won't be t= oo disruptive to anyone's usual workflow. What will be the process to bootstrap git? Thanks >=20 > Steve (with portmgr@ hat) > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?DE28B6E5-B144-4E2B-8274-702DAECF977E>