On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 08:35:55AM +0100, Stefan Esser wrote: > ... > I'm working on FLAVOR support in portmaster. My version did already build > all updated ports, the FLAVOR parameter is passed to build sub-processes, > but there is still some confusion between multiple flavored versions of the > same port (installing the py27 version wants to deinstall the py36 version > and vice versa), which I still have to fix.
Thank you; that is encouraging. > I'm not sure that I have time to complete the fix today, but it is not too > hard. Ports need to complement the port origin with the FLAVOR, where > appropriate (e.g. when a flavored destination is found in MOVED). Already > installed packages are annotated with "flavor" and that must be passed to > the build command, when that port is updated. Most other logic in portmaster > remains unaffected. That seems reasonable. > My work version has all non PKG_NG support stripped, but that is mainly to > not waste effort fixing irrelevant sub-routines. Also reasonable, IMO. > Is it acceptable, to have portmaster stop supporting the old package system? > AFAIK, there is no way that a modern ports tree with flavor support works > with a non-PKG_NG infrastructure? I believe so: if for no other reason, one wishing to support such a non-PKG_NG infrastructure can certainly use an older version of portmaster. > Regards, STefan > .... Peace, david -- David H. Wolfskill da...@catwhisker.org Trump is an incompetent, lying bully who is unfit for any public office. See http://www.catwhisker.org/~david/publickey.gpg for my public key.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
