Re: An introduction to DPorts

[Justin Sherrill <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

--f46d0401fa67e2958e04d26e4c77
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm thinking about pkgsrc bulk builds in comparison, because we already
have pkgsrc building machines and binary download locations that could also
support DPorts.

If I read your example right, there wouldn't be a DragonFly 3.4 (Latest) -
once 3.6 is out, 3.4 wouldn't be getting updates.  That's two less versions
to build for, at least.

Did you want to have this as part of the 3.4 release?  That would require
the DPorts equivalents of the pkgsrc packages in src/nrelease to all build.
 We'd also have to create DPorts versions of the packages that make up the
installer, and have a final location for package storage for people to use
pkg and install binaries.

None of this is necessarily news; I'm just thinking out loud of what this
potentially entails for release.




On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 4:52 AM, John Marino <dragonflybsd@marino.st> wrote:

> On 1/3/2013 03:56, Justin Sherrill wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:46 PM, John Marino <dragonflybsd@marino.st
>> <mailto:dragonflybsd@marino.st**>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     The long-term plan is that building from source will *not* be
>>     recommended to new users.  Since theoretically every single port in
>>     the repository is buildable, every single one of them should be
>>     stored in an official binary repository.  The first recommendation
>>     will be to install from binary.  Packages should not be missing.  I
>>     am aiming for something reliable and complete.
>>
>>
>> How is the binary repository built up?  I think you were using
>> poudriere, but if so I assume it's not the same version that is
>> available from the etoilebsd.net <http://etoilebsd.net> site.  I'd like
>>
>> to try building a large chunk of packages and testing installs/etc,
>> especially to compare to the pkgsrc bulk build process.
>>
>
> The DragonFly version of poudriere is in ports-mgmt/poudriere in DPorts.
>  It is extremely patched and it's still in development considering what
> Fran=E7ois and I have experienced with bulk building recently.  Regular
> FreeBSD users are beginning to leverage poudriere in interesting ways and=
 I
> think eventually we can recommend that as well.
>
> I would not compare poudriere to pkgsrc bulk build process.  For one,
> there's no concept of "quarterly branches" in DPorts.  Building should be
> continuous and on-demand.  The infrastructure has not been set up yet.
>
> I am thinking about maintaining several binary repositories
> simultaneously, e.g.:
>
> A. DragonFly Release 3.4 (Static)
>    i386 version
>    x86_64 version
> B. DragonFly Release 3.4 (Latest versions)
>    i386 version
>    x86_64 version
> C. DragonFly Release 3.6 (Static)
>    i386 version
>    x86_64 version
> D. DragonFly Release 3.6 (Latest versions)
>    i386 version
>    x86_64 version
>
> Then when DragonFly 3.8 is released, maintenance on the 3.4 repositories
> will cease.  So basically packages will be newly-built for up to 2 releas=
es.
>
> I forgot to mention last night:
> DPorts will not be available for Release 3.2.x or earlier.  It requires
> 3.3.x or later.  Earlier releases will be limited to pkgsrc.
>
> John
>

--f46d0401fa67e2958e04d26e4c77
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div>I&#39;m thinking about pkgsrc bulk builds in comparison, because we al=
ready have pkgsrc building machines and binary download locations that coul=
d also support DPorts. =A0</div><div><br></div><div>If I read your example =
right, there wouldn&#39;t be a DragonFly 3.4 (Latest) - once 3.6 is out, 3.=
4 wouldn&#39;t be getting updates. =A0That&#39;s two less versions to build=
 for, at least.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Did you want to have this as part of the 3.4 release? =
=A0That would require the DPorts equivalents of the pkgsrc packages in src/=
nrelease to all build. =A0We&#39;d also have to create DPorts versions of t=
he packages that make up the installer, and have a final location for packa=
ge storage for people to use pkg and install binaries. =A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>None of this is necessarily news; I&#39;m just thinking=
 out loud of what this potentially entails for release.</div><div><br></div=
><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, =
Jan 3, 2013 at 4:52 AM, John Marino <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto=
:dragonflybsd@marino.st" target=3D"_blank">dragonflybsd@marino.st</a>&gt;</=
span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">On 1/3/2013 03:56, Justin =
Sherrill wrote:<br>
</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-l=
eft:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"im">
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:46 PM, John Marino &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:dragonfly=
bsd@marino.st" target=3D"_blank">dragonflybsd@marino.st</a><br></div><div c=
lass=3D"im">
&lt;mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dragonflybsd@marino.st"; target=3D"_blank">drag=
onflybsd@marino.st</a><u></u>&gt;&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 The long-term plan is that building from source will *not* be<br>
=A0 =A0 recommended to new users. =A0Since theoretically every single port =
in<br>
=A0 =A0 the repository is buildable, every single one of them should be<br>
=A0 =A0 stored in an official binary repository. =A0The first recommendatio=
n<br>
=A0 =A0 will be to install from binary. =A0Packages should not be missing. =
=A0I<br>
=A0 =A0 am aiming for something reliable and complete.<br>
<br>
<br>
How is the binary repository built up? =A0I think you were using<br>
poudriere, but if so I assume it&#39;s not the same version that is<br></di=
v>
available from the <a href=3D"http://etoilebsd.net"; target=3D"_blank">etoil=
ebsd.net</a> &lt;<a href=3D"http://etoilebsd.net"; target=3D"_blank">http://=
etoilebsd.net</a>&gt; site. =A0I&#39;d like<div class=3D"im"><br>
to try building a large chunk of packages and testing installs/etc,<br>
especially to compare to the pkgsrc bulk build process.<br>
</div></blockquote>
<br>
The DragonFly version of poudriere is in ports-mgmt/poudriere in DPorts. =
=A0It is extremely patched and it&#39;s still in development considering wh=
at Fran=E7ois and I have experienced with bulk building recently. =A0Regula=
r FreeBSD users are beginning to leverage poudriere in interesting ways and=
 I think eventually we can recommend that as well.<br>

<br>
I would not compare poudriere to pkgsrc bulk build process. =A0For one, the=
re&#39;s no concept of &quot;quarterly branches&quot; in DPorts. =A0Buildin=
g should be continuous and on-demand. =A0The infrastructure has not been se=
t up yet.<br>

<br>
I am thinking about maintaining several binary repositories simultaneously,=
 e.g.:<br>
<br>
A. DragonFly Release 3.4 (Static)<br>
=A0 =A0i386 version<br>
=A0 =A0x86_64 version<br>
B. DragonFly Release 3.4 (Latest versions)<br>
=A0 =A0i386 version<br>
=A0 =A0x86_64 version<br>
C. DragonFly Release 3.6 (Static)<br>
=A0 =A0i386 version<br>
=A0 =A0x86_64 version<br>
D. DragonFly Release 3.6 (Latest versions)<br>
=A0 =A0i386 version<br>
=A0 =A0x86_64 version<br>
<br>
Then when DragonFly 3.8 is released, maintenance on the 3.4 repositories wi=
ll cease. =A0So basically packages will be newly-built for up to 2 releases=
.<br>
<br>
I forgot to mention last night:<br>
DPorts will not be available for Release 3.2.x or earlier. =A0It requires 3=
.3.x or later. =A0Earlier releases will be limited to pkgsrc.<span class=3D=
"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
<br>
John<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>

--f46d0401fa67e2958e04d26e4c77--