Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 09:35:51 -0500 From: linimon@lonesome.com (Mark Linimon) To: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, "freebsd-questions@FreeBSD. ORG" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>, fbsd1@a1poweruser.com Subject: Re: ports missing their packages. Message-ID: <20081029143551.GA6191@soaustin.net> In-Reply-To: <790a9fff0810290242m58012ac5r10bb761f65c97a1c@mail.gmail.com> References: <NBECLJEKGLBKHHFFANMBMECBCMAA.fbsd1@a1poweruser.com> <NBECLJEKGLBKHHFFANMBIEDJCMAA.fbsd1@a1poweruser.com> <790a9fff0810290242m58012ac5r10bb761f65c97a1c@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 04:42:18AM -0500, Scot Hetzel wrote: > So you are advocating that port maintainers have to create packages > for all the supported FreeBSD architecture's (amd64, arm, i386, ia64, > mips, pc98, powerpc, sparc64, sun4v). That would be 9 packages > needing to be created at the time the port maintainer submits the > upgrade PR. Nope, not 9 :-) You are forgetting FreeBSD 6, 7, and -current have builds enabled. OTOH, portmgr is only supporting amd64, i386, and sparc64 right now, and is not doing sparc64-8 due to lack of machines, so really the matrix is "only" 8. The ia64 package builds were stopped due to problems (and the fact that we only have 2 machines). There are no package building machines for the others yet -- and some of them ae really only going to be used for embedded systems, so only a very minimal subset of ports is going to be useful. So far, we've talked about addding machines for these, but there are no fixed plans so far. > It could be as simple as forgetting to add the ports subdirectory to > the category Makefile (i.e www/Makefile). Actually this is an uncommon problem; every time portmgr builds a package set, error messages are spit out if things are missing, and we are quick to email the maintainers :-) mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081029143551.GA6191>