Hi Mark, Mark Millard <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2024, at 05:13, Jamie Landeg-Jones <ja...@catflap.org> wrote: > > > I've probably grasped the wrong ideas from this thread. I thought it was > > about the implied effective deprecation of the ports infrastructure for > > a binary package only structure, with poudriere being used to create > > custom packages in any way it wants going forward. > > Please do not confuse the original thread's overall range of points > with this more technical subthread. I've been limiting myself to the > subthread's subject area as best I can. Given that focus, . . . > > To my knowledge, poudriere is a user of the ports and pkg > infrastructures (that both exist independent of poudriere), never > the other way around. In that it is like portmaster: layered > on top without invalidating the infrastructures below. > > This also makes poudriere just one of multiple alternatives. > I've not suggested eliminating any of them. Thanks for the reply. That makes it clearer. I did indeed get confused by the way the thread evolved. Cheers, Jamie
