From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 26 16:40:39 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2FF31065670 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:40:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5832E8FC0A for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:40:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkvi18 with SMTP id i18so146214bkv.13 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=p/NTHM4H5c9IdvFeztp6uNLN0b3OFcLltUMIvmq78FE=; b=mr9SrsWspGIjiC98ikK99E3iM1GxZZ/1lS05HizorK7zosnproURh+c8j6coMjQeT8 iteKq7BZulxnlHiBouc8+5Z9XcOf7DvWjPmIiloT4wQLIawuonQJ6wdSBKxeMLu5x7uM nsUGzrKaO8tVTYMs88eh8TSc78+mtqqezJHoFdWFe2hHrbHg/hH5ecs1rV9QGF6LcFKM zJ04GwK7JBbupsqc7SCeIezEYa/zpRJF4d2RBcb505tUnHF4PAoBsuG+5i9qEuO+gPvB RtGhbT5sqlq7gSBJWljIDvTE5+sTCLpiwbap4hec2RIaJUZKMIKBF/10iBGhw3HVgzzL xfKg== Received: by 10.204.152.75 with SMTP id f11mr5787076bkw.103.1340728838434; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: utisoft@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.49.87 with HTTP; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 09:40:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120626162055.0b2bdb0d@gumby.homeunix.com> References: <4FE8E4A4.9070507@gmail.com> <20120626065732.GH41054@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <20120626092645.Horde.HytQbVNNcXdP6WQ1aMtjoMA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE96BA0.6040005@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4FE97008.2060501@netfence.it> <4FE97AE1.9080109@infracaninophile.co.uk> <4FE9817C.7020905@netfence.it> <4FE99200.7050107@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20120626130715.Horde.eb3fPtjz9kRP6ZfjA7sSFoA@webmail.df.eu> <4FE9AB85.3070106@infracaninophile.co.uk> <20120626162055.0b2bdb0d@gumby.homeunix.com> From: Chris Rees Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:40:08 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: IO-3nqa__o3Jb8EIlLsX-kBpKLI Message-ID: To: RW , ports@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Subject: Re: Port system "problems" X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:40:39 -0000 On 26 June 2012 16:20, RW wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:31:01 +0100 > Matthew Seaman wrote: > > >> What's different in the new scheme? >> >> =A0 1 options dialogue >> =A0 2 fetch & verify distfiles >> =A0 3 extract >> =A0 4 patch >> =A0 5 configure >> =A0 6 compile >> =A0 7 install to staging directory tree *** >> =A0 8 create packages, sub-packages *** >> =A0 9 install packages and sub-packages as selected *** > > > >> Whether the extra/different work done in stages 7, 8 and 9 will negate >> the savings from only doing stages 1-6 once remains to be seen. =A0My >> prediction is that mostly you'ld come out ahead, but whether you do, >> and by how much will vary significantly between individual ports. > > It's not really worth looking at individual ports. It's the average on > major updates that really matters. In my experience most of he time > is spent building, and I just don't think that there all that much to be > gained in the compile stage. > > The staging area is appealing in its own right. I'm less keen > on sub-packages which are going to break update tools. I think it's > very likely =A0that only portmaster would survive. Nah, the new maintainer for portupgrade is heavily involved in development, and is actually now a pkgng developer. Also, with pkgng the emphasis is more on binary upgrades. We really shouldn't still be compiling from source for everything in this day and age-- we're one of only two major projects that still do this as the main upgrade solution. Chris