[Bug 247506] Example "poudriere ports -c" command example in Porter's Handbook section 10.5.6 errors out if -M directory already populated

[bugzilla-noreply at freebsd.org]

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=247506

            Bug ID: 247506
           Summary: Example "poudriere ports -c" command example in
                    Porter's Handbook section 10.5.6 errors out if -M
                    directory already populated
           Product: Documentation
           Version: Latest
          Hardware: Any
               URL: https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/port
                    ers-handbook/testing-poudriere.html
                OS: Any
            Status: New
          Severity: Affects Only Me
          Priority: ---
         Component: Documentation
          Assignee: doc at FreeBSD.org
          Reporter: pauamma at gundo.com
                CC: bdrewery at FreeBSD.org

Adapting that example to my ports layout (/usr/ports empty and svn co of ports
tree under ~/ports for ease of port maintenance) gives me:

% sudo poudriere ports -c -F f none -M ~/ports -p libudisks
[00:00:00] Error: Directory not empty at /home/pauamma/ports

After staring at the poudriere-ports manpage a bit, I tried:
% sudo poudriere ports -c -m null -M ~/ports -p libudisks
[00:00:00] Imported ports tree "libudisks" from /home/pauamma/ports

The rest of the port testing sequence proceeded without incident, so I assume
that command was OK, so I'd like to use it instead of the erroring command for
the handbook, on the grounds that it's really counterintuitive to have a
"directory must only be populated *after* issuing this command" restriction at
this point in the workflow implied by the handbook order. However, since I'm
not a poudriere expert, I'd like one to comment on the proposed language change
before I submit a Phabricator review. (Cc'd bdrewery at FreeBSD.org to that
effect, on the grounds that they're the port maintainer and thus presumably
know more about poudriere than I do.)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.