From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Aug 7 05:24:58 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@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 4A2609B49DF; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 05:24:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ob0-x236.google.com (mail-ob0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::236]) (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 22E6AFF7; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 05:24:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kob6558@gmail.com) Received: by obdeg2 with SMTP id eg2so72064170obd.0; Thu, 06 Aug 2015 22:24:57 -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:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vG3qi9sSNO2X8iHKCyH/PZShgL/v3ZFDp+ibnfeHh2c=; b=aqW0XSrGY38mAmY6dS+GAhSc4O5cHX9vB//TmZSG+nZb8mAOEeJ8YBSotw+W250ple yDIIxd5m78idDZ74yhBFvRZaJ48ilYbxTS4VA6vXrtjk81Fu38qRrgr4Y2Ro00RozIvB oqyk3sJHCBKh0RXB2mWLXzxugvFNzBsrz7y7wrq+DRGxM56zBe7UndnEjgTc+7dAaZAN Jv3+nIhpc9EdEHLeYWFBnu6/BKylG/CXlG6FGLnqyaEvNOe0NVdMxQrkWuMCsqok3goH 6tNBuU9HIE5TvupZ5F5Nqw5Hxx8PgVM7cJCXBwhh9ofBHX0lu1y8uI4O9978aL41CbO3 DEnw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.97.10 with SMTP id dw10mr5163070obb.60.1438925097337; Thu, 06 Aug 2015 22:24:57 -0700 (PDT) Sender: kob6558@gmail.com Received: by 10.202.221.69 with HTTP; Thu, 6 Aug 2015 22:24:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201508070458.t774wiqp073664@dyslexicfish.net> References: <55C3F9AA.4020602@delphij.net> <201508070458.t774wiqp073664@dyslexicfish.net> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 22:24:57 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PZN9DJD1_u-_IFUSUcvJa-ObQmQ Message-ID: Subject: Re: Proposal: make portsnap generate INDEX-${OSREL:R} only by default From: Kevin Oberman To: Jamie Landeg-Jones Cc: Xin LI , FreeBSD Ports ML , FreeBSD Current Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.20 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 05:24:58 -0000 On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 9:58 PM, Jamie Landeg-Jones wrote: > Kevin Oberman wrote: > > > Isn't rebuilding the index useful for people running STABLE? I assume > that > > I need a current index to get useful output from "pkg version -vL=". I am > > probably a bit unusual in that I keep a current ports tre on a STABLE > > system, but there are a couple of ports that I need to build due to > custom > > options and I find poudriere overkill for this case. I suspect many > people > > running STABLE may use portsnap and build everything from ports. (This > use > > to be common fairly recently and likely still is.) > > I run stable, and compile from source with a current ports tree on all my > machines too. > > But... > > > Or, am I missing the obvious... something I seem to do too often these > days. > > ... maybe I'm missing something that you haven't missed, which is more > likely! : > > I've already altered my portsnap.conf to only produce INDEX-10, and from > what I > can gather, this is basically what Xin Li is proposing becomes the > default..., > i.e. only produce INDEX-9 for 9.X, INDEX-10 for 10.X and INDEX-11 for 11.X > > Isn't it the case that the index required is 'tuned' to the dependencies > each > port requires based on base software (e.g. the index file on 10.X upwards > won't > list a dependency on converters/libiconv) so even if you portsnap your > ports > tree, it's still INDEX-10 you'd require on a FreeBSD-10.X machine..? > > Cheers, > Jamie > Yes, I was missing the obvious. I am a bit concerned about some edge cases involving system upgrades. Of course, if everyone follows recommendation and rebuilds all ports after a major version upgrade, it should work fine. Or the code in portsnap could be modified to get the current running version. This would need to be an option that could be turned off for the few people who actually need more than one index file. Still, looks like a good idea to me! -- Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired E-mail: rkoberman@gmail.com PGP Fingerprint: D03FB98AFA78E3B78C1694B318AB39EF1B055683