Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2016 08:51:36 +0000 From: "Thomas Mueller" <mueller6722@twc.com> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The ports collection has some serious issues Message-ID: <EA.CB.31287.C9CF4585@dnvrco-omsmta01> References: <e2fb7eec-b894-a1e4-eb6d-2e1c5b500a44@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From John Marino: > At face value, this doesn't make sense because synth is a tool for building > everything from source, so your development system is exactly where it should > be installed. > So you must be talking about build dependencies of synth (there are no run > dependencies). While I think the requirement of rebuilding synth from source > is artificial, I've provided a very reasonable approach to solving this which > I feel compelled to repeat for the readers of Kevin's post. The solution: > Starting with a clean system: > 1) install synth from binary package from official freebsd builder (a single > package) > 2) Configure synth if necessary > 3) command synth to build itself > 4) pkg delete synth (system is once again clean) > 5) pkg add -F /path/to/synth/packages/synth-* > Now you have a system containing s/w built by itself. On an modest system > less than 4 years old, it might take 30 minutes at most. > So the "synth has dependencies" detraction is extremely weak. For people that > trust FreeBSD to provide untainted binaries, it's not an issue at all and for > the paranoid, it's easily worked around. Saying that the use of Ada limits it > to the platforms it can run on natively is a valid detraction, but it's BUILD > dependencies really aren't due to the availability of binary packages, the > PRIMARY product of the ports tree. > RE: poudriere, it has no dependencies. It's just as appropriate on the dev > system and adding a jail and configuring it also takes less than 30 minutes. > Either is very appropriate for a system that must build everything that is run > on it. I believe you could cd $PORTSDIR/ports-mgmt/synth and make package-recursive |& tee build-12amd64.log (or whatever you want to name the log file; this example if for shell tcsh)? For a system with pkgng, is there any difference in package format between "make install", portmaster and portupgrade? If your system already has portmaster, you could portmaster ports-mgmt/synth |& tee synth-12amd64.log? And then switch from portmaster to synth for all further ports builds/updates? It would not be necessary to start with a clean system for FreeBSD, as opposed to NetBSD, or am I mistaken here? First port-upgrading tool I used in FreeBSD was portupgrade. Subsequently I switched to portmaster. Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?EA.CB.31287.C9CF4585>