From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Tue Dec 20 08:11:43 2016 Return-Path: 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 4E90AC8654A for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 08:11:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dewaynegeraghty@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-x229.google.com (mail-it0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17E21134E; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 08:11:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dewaynegeraghty@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-x229.google.com with SMTP id c20so76229271itb.0; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:11:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=+jBH0nZFHwnX47uDB7uktPrV5X8RcOxoMgwai1CW8CI=; b=JbQjfEUrbDyZVw2xuKJABc3Tbb+d3lam4ETMUkAZztURZwsZYKREIgMxtjnGE8ElW2 BlpV2VkENNDI1x4WYRKwSxSRZH5Gf+D+wCGt6ZUnN2aH+11fck+I6HVyL6DZKViGO4Qn Vj6xc8OAnrp14AEBiVtigz/FTDl8Sj7uOhoVeyHuhMLTOIjYVBiViYdj8WGy6YkqFJIw HKaG99KEsrlxQfyLnjfwyeo7zTTbgXtV/DPkvYbxBIKkzrG5BwQa2UuluJcG+a/H6Dix i+pHVwzMdRgnxukQ2YBSYaeT8/g7kShXjhQBTASYpJyIo9AbrcpK8ZCIj9NFPmN02mFP fdRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+jBH0nZFHwnX47uDB7uktPrV5X8RcOxoMgwai1CW8CI=; b=gePCi1lFaGwNAJk2SzbG1LUP5nSkwtjhCIY18yaTqH0DaL6tRi/mppygtguZsZFp0C iab+d8sfjVn4PvOmbdVmmkU3Z1GjR2vJsu4jCcigP2pOPYB2JD0q1mEw2+cCkJ7B0kKj fbe09cOvDRJBm4nZO5wEZnlYDgU2iYPBgPfIZBr6PHRcnCzKcqC+VtbA7sHcl03K0pV2 f4T+cUARfoI7Ptx9rMpepI+CH/g22hzxEOOgBa8Zf4F1Itx9XmJaXiTAC0SKjTmUCqwL KdYFuBSJIxAtUdf65YYyfXcTuTbG9NYotnsyFBTL9cDlOW+owRohNcEYVzY1HvxH0Pqq w85w== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKqmUwhgT9Ffg2ZYEAFw3pDltMS8XipT+1gL7CswQRKOOz2Zdik/7RRrStHWvhb2djX3/XqvVdaZaB2EA== X-Received: by 10.36.20.4 with SMTP id 4mr801660itg.93.1482221502234; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:11:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.79.35.165 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Dec 2016 00:11:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <8bc4754a-7200-b91d-8435-c6ff1970b56b@FreeBSD.org> References: <20161219003143.c2qo5wn3a5kiua3m@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> <58725f6d-aa60-3a62-7539-56e51e3cd76e@m5p.com> <8bc4754a-7200-b91d-8435-c6ff1970b56b@FreeBSD.org> From: Dewayne Geraghty Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 19:11:11 +1100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: HEADSUP: FLAVORS (initial version) and subpackages proposals To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: ports-list freebsd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.23 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 08:11:43 -0000 Thanks Bapt et al, I use FreeBSD and the ports system extensively, we build everything from source and largely customise approx 25% of the 900 packages we rely upon. I'm more than a little concerned to have changes performed against the ports infrastructure. As our primary sources of (whats coming) "Change" information are the: Quarterly reports and the OS Release Notes; after-the-fact sources are a daily review of https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-stable-11/2016-December/thread.html for OS impact; and the excellent Freshports. So a few questions: Could you be able to enlighten us (the readers) so we can better understand what will be changed; or share your vision of the benefits and operational impact for operational people that build: from source; and those that only use binary? Is there a transition plan or schedule for the bulk of these changes to occur? Will the flavors/subpackages be developed separately from the existing ports suite? (I'm hoping that the parent ports will be unaffected, and so our existing build procedures continue to build correctly) How will we (the users/admins) track or be informed of changes or better, planned/soon changes? (will changes to ports, particularly parent ports, be co-ordinated through UPDATING or perhaps a new FLAVOURS file if the parent is say a stub and the real decisions are relocated to slaves?) Will there be any guidance regarding how flavours/packages should be created or the criteria for creating sub-packages (secure/insecure; all options on/off; most useable options on; most liked by the maintainer; most likely to be used for a datacentre; most likely to be used for desktops; ...)? Will "The Porter's Handbook" be updated for things like criteria; naming conventions etc? For folks (like me) that build entirely from source and customise options to build the applications, how will flavours/subpackages be of benefit? Will the ability to customise ports, as they exist today, remain? Will I even notice a change? I'd like to plan ahead to make this transition seemless and continue to use FreeBSD and the excellent ports system as we do now. I started with FreeBSD 2.2.8. There were packages available from the FreeBSD website. It was a terrific aid. We also enjoyed the different flavours of jail that were provided by ezjail. However over time, both evolved as did our expertise to customise our ports (~200 custom ports) and Jamie Gratton evolved the jail system to eliminate our need of the excellent ezjail tool. So I can see merit in, what very little I'm guessing of, the next evolution of ports. Aside: we already build different package configurations from existing ports' source. (eg different bind910 with/without kerberos; different samba44's; simultaineous building of dhcp-[server|client|relay] etc) I look forward to being on the same page and to understand where this is going, the likely/potential impact; the naming conventions; etc. Kind regards, Dewayne.