From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 27 01:28:52 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@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 49BE43E3 for ; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 01:28:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "wonkity.com", Issuer "wonkity.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF9C26414D for ; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 01:28:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id sBR1SoSt073314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:28:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) with ESMTP id sBR1SoHF073311; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:28:50 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:28:49 -0700 (MST) From: Warren Block To: Rolf Nielsen Subject: Re: Do I want to switch to the new pkg(8) format? In-Reply-To: <549E05F4.7090704@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <549E007B.8090101@gmx.us> <549E05F4.7090704@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (BSF 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:28:50 -0700 (MST) Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 01:28:52 -0000 On Sat, 27 Dec 2014, Rolf Nielsen wrote: > On 2014-12-27 01:57, Warren Block wrote: >> 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 then >>> later upgrade it with . >> >> 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. > > Whatever happened to portmanager? Updates to it stopped and eventually it was cycled out of ports.