From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org  Mon Oct  2 18:51:43 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2AE7E24A3B
 for <freebsd-ports@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Mon,  2 Oct 2017 18:51:43 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from gw.catspoiler.org (unknown [IPv6:2602:304:b010:ef20::f2])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "gw.catspoiler.org", Issuer "gw.catspoiler.org" (not verified))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C20AB73630
 for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Mon,  2 Oct 2017 18:51:43 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from FreeBSD.org (mousie.catspoiler.org [192.168.101.2])
 by gw.catspoiler.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v92IpXbH034114;
 Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
 (envelope-from truckman@FreeBSD.org)
Message-Id: <201710021851.v92IpXbH034114@gw.catspoiler.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2017 11:51:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
Subject: Re: Status of portupgrade and portmaster?
To: mbeis@xs4all.nl
cc: mueller6722@twc.com, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, fullermd@over-yonder.net
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.21.1710021956350.2025@yokozuna>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2017 18:51:44 -0000

On  2 Oct, Marco Beishuizen wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2017, the wise Don Lewis wrote:
> 
>> Yes it can.  If you use the svn method when creating a jail you can 
>> chose any arbitrary source branch from the svn repository and then you 
>> can specify any desired svn revision on that branch when you update the 
>> jail.  You would probably want to use this method when building ports 
>> for 12.0-CURRENT rather than creating the jail using a 12.0-CURRENT 
>> snapshot.
> 
> I'm running 11.1-STABLE now, upgrading every few months or when there is 
> an important security fix. Do I have to build a new system twice in that 
> case (once my running system and once the poudriere jail)?

Yes, but at least the poudriere jail doesn't build the kernel bits.  The
real pain point is that when you update the jail, the next bulk package
build will toss all the previously built packages and force a full
rebuild from scratch.  That makes sense if you believe that the contents
of the jail affect the contents of the packages build using that jail.
If you don't think that is true, then why bother to update the jail.

I stick to pretty much the same schedule as you for updating my -STABLE
machines, though I'm doing it for 10.4-STABLE i386, 11.1-STABLE amd64
and i386, and 12.0-CURRENT amd64.  I try to do weekly package update
runs.