Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 15:20:43 -0700 From: Russell Jackson <raj@csub.edu> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysutils/puppet: disabling freebsd ports package provider Message-ID: <4BBBB3BB.5050904@csub.edu> In-Reply-To: <4BBBB14C.5030101@foster.cc> References: <4BBB9C2B.4070804@csub.edu> <4BBBB14C.5030101@foster.cc>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 04/06/2010 03:10 PM, Mark Foster wrote: > On 04/06/2010 01:40 PM, Russell Jackson wrote: >> Is there any objection to the ports provider being disabled on FreeBSD >> systems since it mostly just causes puppet to hang anyway? I've had no >> luck in fixing it. The problem is that portupgrade and script don't >> interact well when running non-interactively. >> >> I've been running it this way in a local port, and I'm thinking of >> disabling it in the official port as well. I'd post a patch for >> upstream as well. If there are no objections, I'll submit a PR for the >> change by the end of the week. >> > > Has this broken behavior been confirmed by anyone else? > I'd like to see the ports provider fixed, if possible. Is portmaster a > more suitable back-end? > I think most people, including myself, use the pkg_* provider with a local package repository. I can't imagine anyone would suffer using the ports provider in its current state. I kept running into hung puppetd processes because portupgrade somehow got installed and automatically caused the ports provider to be used instead; hence, the permanent disablement. I haven't looked into using portmaster. Might be worthwhile. -- Russell A. Jackson <raj@csub.edu> Network Analyst California State University, Bakersfield
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4BBBB3BB.5050904>