From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 21 15:25:46 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0CD3B2AC for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:25:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0E171602 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:25:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t3LFPjeV056680 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:25:45 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 199571] ports-mgmt/portmaster: [change-request] please ban portmaster Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:25:46 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Ports & Packages X-Bugzilla-Component: Individual Port(s) X-Bugzilla-Version: Latest X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: portmaster@bsdforge.com X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 15:25:46 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199571 --- Comment #3 from Chris Hutchinson --- (In reply to John Marino from comment #2) > (In reply to Chris Hutchinson from comment #1) > > I might also add; it works. So what exactly is your beef, again? > > Maybe in your universe it works. For it's intended purpose, it works. At least as well as most "utilitarian" type ports -- it has it's issues, as do the others. I wish that the OP had combined this with: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=199572 it would have made his case here more coherent. This feels like a rant, after his expressed experience in the other PR. The other PR looks like an install, as opposed to an upgrade; which is what ports-mgmt/portmaster's intended use-case is. > > Working ports don't have PR lists like > this:http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portoverview.py?category=ports- > mgmt&portname=portmaster&wildcard= Several of those are dupes, and most are at least a year old. > > > This port should be banned. Now without a _REAL_ maintainer, it's well on > it's way. bdrewery@ was maintaining it up to at least 4 weeks ago. Are you suggesting I maintain this port, that it might get the attention it needs. Or will that just make me the scourge of the committers? IMHO portmaster is a far better choice for upgrades, than pkg, it you're building from source. It affords you options *other* than default. Which pkg doesn't cater well to, if at all. --Chris -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.