From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Tue Jan 30 18:28:48 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2C15EDAA58; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:28:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6741F7A618; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:28:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: from pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id w0UIScGd026084; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:28:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id w0UIScsT026083; Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:28:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <201801301828.w0UIScsT026083@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: svn commit: r328593 - head/release/scripts In-Reply-To: <239eb049-ae34-781f-a2c8-0d47cf545e72@freebsd.org> To: Nathan Whitehorn Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 10:28:38 -0800 (PST) CC: Steve Wills , src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Reply-To: rgrimes@freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 18:28:48 -0000 > Do we even want to include the ports tree on install media? Extracting > ports from some out-of-date tarball doesn't seem to match best practices > for ports and it takes up quite a lot of space. > -Nathan Yes, you want to ship a known working known building and tested ports tree with the release, as there is no tag to pull this specific tree out of svn. I suppose it might be ok top stop putting it in the .iso's, but this tarball should remain avaliable with the distrubtion file sets on the ftp server. You may consider it "out of date" I consider it "known to build" and "probably working binaries". > On 01/30/18 08:34, Steve Wills wrote: > > Author: swills (ports committer) > > Date: Tue Jan 30 16:34:56 2018 > > New Revision: 328593 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/328593 > > > > Log: > > Change installer default to not install ports tree > > > > Reviewed by: gjb, dteske, allanjude, bdrewery, mat > > Approved by: gjb > > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D14064 > > > > Modified: > > head/release/scripts/make-manifest.sh > > > > Modified: head/release/scripts/make-manifest.sh > > ============================================================================== > > --- head/release/scripts/make-manifest.sh Tue Jan 30 16:24:15 2018 (r328592) > > +++ head/release/scripts/make-manifest.sh Tue Jan 30 16:34:56 2018 (r328593) > > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ desc_tests="${tests}" > > > > default_doc=off > > default_src=off > > +default_ports=off > > default_tests=off > > default_base_dbg=off > > default_lib32_dbg=off > > > > > -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org