Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:57:07 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Dutch Ingraham <stoa@gmx.us> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Do I want to switch to the new pkg(8) format? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.11.1412261750190.26354@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <549E007B.8090101@gmx.us> References: <CAPi0psuei36LjMFT_B7DF3dWhTz=RK28r-kxKdyeNJx1YSapdg@mail.gmail.com> <549E007B.8090101@gmx.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 26 Dec 2014, Dutch Ingraham wrote: > Once you have a current tree, there are generally three ways to build > the port (i.e., make a binary, executable "package" out of it): make (1), the > portmaster (8) tool, or the portupgrade tool. They are not mutually > exclusive, i.e., you can install a port with <cd /usr/ports/category/port && > make install clean> then later upgrade it with <portmaster category/port>. Right. Really, all that portmaster or portupgrade do is automate some of the steps. Both of these tools grew out of the problem of upgrading. When there are several things to upgrade, packages which are required by the others must be upgraded first. portmaster/portupgrade sort out the dependencies and build the requirements in the right order. They do that by using the standard port make targets. In fact, it is possible to get them to show a list of what they would do, and then do it by hand yourself. What I'm trying to say is that they automate the process, but it is still the ports system that is doing the building.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.11.1412261750190.26354>