Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:09:02 -0700 From: Adam Weinberger <adamw@adamw.org> To: abi <abi@abinet.ru> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Status of synth following expulsion of John Marino? Message-ID: <745FB9DE-D067-4757-8916-D1028627183D@adamw.org> In-Reply-To: <58A4A95F.20303@abinet.ru> References: <33.4E.19143.3DE14A85@dnvrco-omsmta03> <3F2A28D7-A3A4-4549-B125-805EC9923F3B@adamw.org> <58A4A227.6080000@abinet.ru> <113653FF-1F93-448E-99C6-9943BBD9DAAE@adamw.org> <58A4A95F.20303@abinet.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 12:17, abi <abi@abinet.ru> wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 15.02.2017 21:58, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 11:47, abi <abi@abinet.ru> wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 15.02.2017 18:00, Adam Weinberger wrote: >>>>> On 15 Feb, 2017, at 2:26, Thomas Mueller <mueller6722@twc.com> = wrote: >>>>>=20 >>>>> Expulsion of John Marino was a shocker to me, caught me by = surprise. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Now my question is what is the status of synth? >>>>>=20 >>>>> Should I switch from portmaster to synth? >>>>>=20 >>>>> If synth is deprecated or dropped, after I switch from portmaster = to synth, then I have to switch back, and this would be a monster mess = of extra work. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Not to be inflammatory here, just want to know where I/we stand = and don't want to go too far off course updating my ports. >>>>=20 >>>> I don't recommend portmaster for anybody. It's unmaintained, it = already causes headaches on upgrades, and even though it works now, it = is unlikely to keep working as the ports tree evolves. >>>=20 >>> This is FUD. Yes, portmaster can be less maintained, but it works = without observable issues, at least I don't see any problems with it on = my systems. synth and poudriere lacks the ability to set and maintain = port options recursively, eliminating any practical (from user = perspective, not developer) use of such software stand alone. >>=20 >> Sure it does. >>=20 >> poudriere options -j jailname editors/vim >>=20 >> Sets options recursively. >>=20 >> Not seeing any problems with it right now isn't the point of my = message. The point is that portmaster WILL break when new features = (currently in progress) are added to the ports build system, and being = unmaintained, there's no guarantees that it will ever unbreak. >>=20 >=20 > Poudriere can't be considered as an option for everyone due to it's = connection to jails, synth can't set options recursively, however it's = extremely simple to use. >=20 > According to current port tree, portmaster has maintainer and it's = simple enough to be fixed by virtually everyone. >=20 > Can you provide link to new features? Never saw that port tree has = some drastically changes. You're right, jails do require more setup, drive space, and complexity = (not to mention being quite slow on UFS). But at the end of the day, = jails are a better paradigm for building ports. Most failures these days = come from the environment influencing the build, or upgrade problems = rebuilding ports when old ports stop working haphazardly. Best effort is = taken to fix these problems, but maintainers and committers can't = predict every setup possibility; the general target is making sure that = they build in a pristine environment, meaning poudriere. = https://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=3D134825+0+archive/2016/free= bsd-ports/20161225.freebsd-ports for the new features I was referring = to. # Adam --=20 Adam Weinberger adamw@adamw.org https://www.adamw.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?745FB9DE-D067-4757-8916-D1028627183D>