From nobody Thu Sep 14 09:27:45 2023 X-Original-To: ports@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4RmX6g5T2Tz4t880 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:27:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Received: from www121.sakura.ne.jp (www121.sakura.ne.jp [153.125.133.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4RmX6Y3pNVz4cdc for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:27:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp has no SPF policy when checking 153.125.133.21) smtp.mailfrom=junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp; dmarc=none Received: from kalamity.joker.local (123-1-88-210.area1b.commufa.jp [123.1.88.210]) (authenticated bits=0) by www121.sakura.ne.jp (8.16.1/8.16.1/[SAKURA-WEB]/20201212) with ESMTPA id 38E9RjDY019641 for ; Thu, 14 Sep 2023 18:27:45 +0900 (JST) (envelope-from junchoon@dec.sakura.ne.jp) Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2023 18:27:45 +0900 From: Tomoaki AOKI To: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: problem with git-pull Message-Id: <20230914182745.a196531f66a750555636a671@dec.sakura.ne.jp> In-Reply-To: References: Organization: Junchoon corps X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; amd64-portbld-freebsd14.0) List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spamd-Bar: - X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.46 / 15.00]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.96)[-0.962]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[ports@freebsd.org]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[sakura.ne.jp]; BLOCKLISTDE_FAIL(0.00)[153.125.133.21:query timed out,123.1.88.210:query timed out]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; HAS_ORG_HEADER(0.00)[]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:7684, ipnet:153.125.128.0/18, country:JP]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[ports@freebsd.org] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4RmX6Y3pNVz4cdc On Thu, 14 Sep 2023 00:10:58 +0200 Jan Beich wrote: > Martin Neubauer writes: > > > On Wed, 13 Sep 2023, Matthias Apitz wrote: > > > >> El día miércoles, septiembre 13, 2023 a las 12:55:20 +0200, Kurt Jaeger escribió: > >> > >>> 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/ports20230806 > >> 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/806 > See also https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-ports/2023-January/003292.html And -S tracks dependencies isufficiently (maybe direct dependencies only), causing build order reversal, thus causing failed build which can usually done on next run. -- Tomoaki AOKI