Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 15:21:12 +0300 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: John Marino <freebsdml@marino.st>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Removing documentation Message-ID: <56BDCE38.30200@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <56BCE218.40403@marino.st> References: <56B754A8.3030605@marino.st> <56BCE01D.4010701@FreeBSD.org> <56BCE218.40403@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 11.02.2016 22:33, John Marino wrote: >>> ports-mgmt/synth. I would love to hear what signficant thing >>> portmaster can do that Synth can't. (honestly) >> Be installed FROM PORTS without all this build-one-more-gcc >> stuff. Ada? For *port*management* tool? Are you joking? > > Let me guess. You've spent actually 0.0 nanoseconds preparing on > the subject before providing this enlightened take for the list. Ok, let me expand. I see here contradiction. There are people who prefer binary packages. There are people who prefer ports (local builds). Both ways are perfectly Ok to me. I'm prefer ports, because I have only a few full-featured FreeBSD installations, and I don't like many ports options defaults (=packages defaults). If I have much more FreeBSD hosts, it could be worth for me to have one custom package repository, but in my particular case, it isn't worth it. So, ports. If I'm using ports, I want to use ports. Not "install this from package and that from ports". And in such situation I want to have set of "non-productive" ports (which doesn't solve server's problem, but bookkeeping ones) minimal. This includes all these auto*-crap, gmake, texinfo, and other build-depends. And have here port-to-manage-ports which needs one-more-bloated-gcc-toolachain is not what I want. And I need to have it here, because there will be moment in time when I'll upgrade (rebuild!) synth itself. Synth could be great package for build server. I'll give it a try to build packages for NanoBSD images, for example (instead of poudriere), for sure. But not fore my ports-based installations. - -- // Lev Serebryakov -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJWvc44XxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXRGOTZEMUNBMEI1RjQzMThCNjc0QjMzMEFF QUIwM0M1OEJGREM0NzhGAAoJEOqwPFi/3EePna4P/2GsGsFvhvSQgxyztBiPhnAL TEcgI3tSsHlzezpDXpHbd8R6SpZF+afvTku09gw7NwlQqdyu2HcvNcX6z2Ss6nLD f0GeqM44bvcSN4b43FVfrkqgo3haCcuy05ocC3a76sE3ZgGDiSLnuY7HPn6ndLCa 32+zFcYzsc9MZoZKUoWl6FtnkEANHag/iTU3o1RXk19JErwZ1ZOEzVgc+Spov5GQ vF2Abx7EZV+CI7mwxHRbwt6/Si1kLDBjA9V/GAH6UTXGAiTDSn6z7zgNrvjWy6SY 0UoHho+yUxKYmH4cUU4g+PHIhPJrOQHu39bXd0jzdQq2rSODgYV/Lg5EEjACRaEP DWvnlK/TNDFQGz7+1MU5TeLdtLJ49b7Z7eEGSNrhKDBmkuRakUkDZ/fHBWiztBuK ZquIvsb/L7SdHGCh0ax4SCJJRQ6ynKQ9SWaXBBtqgbWfUvLhp2Jd2vaON3AyfT6j ihxEFmuLD0P3VIEHvoVA3SKuOXLA4boLhPwjvDBQ3Sn5KxeY8TFXjg7EmixphOhC l3g5rekga3vvM9A+Wsg4PpGGWVabwavopu1kT4IBRfXzRHTyIT29C83DjfG6Yyvl UYg53Zv1zOnhK0qjHLKHLCU4UJflIDRLi6tiMQpk5u5WXFZ4on4U1Femq8DeLnan sn3e/ikh6V9XpvhG2OoL =j2XG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56BDCE38.30200>