poudriere(-devel) ports updating question

[Paul Mather]

On Mar 6, 2019, at 3:58 PM, tech-lists <tech-lists at zyxst.net> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 06:23:49PM +0100, Stefan Bethke wrote:
>>> Am 05.03.2019 um 15:09 schrieb tech-lists <tech-lists at zyxst.net>:
> 
>>> Basically I'm looking for exclude mask functionality when updating a
>>> ports tree with poudriere ports.
>>> 
>>> Do I need to do this manually or have I missed something?
>> 
>> I don’t think it’s easy to do that. How would you handle dependencies? (For example, some ports require X11 libs and stuff, even though they’re in a different category.)
> 
> You're right of course. My logic was wrong, and wrong premise[1] because I
> was stuck on thinking a bulk -a build. But I found how to do it (to remove categories) in case anyone is interested. The key is in the
> method used to update the tree, which is svn+https.
> 
> so, from the top of the ports tree, svn update --set-depth=exclude biology would exclude the biology category permanently. svn update --set-depth=infinity biology would re-add it.
> svn update --set-depth=infinity would make it be like nothing was
> excluded in the first place.
> 
> but on reflection, it breaks a little of the ports infrastructure and I
> don't want to do that.


That's correct: omitting parts of the ports hierarchy might break a particular ports build catastrophically.

If you're looking to exclude certain functionality when building ports you should investigate using ports options to achieve that.

For example, I have a poudriere jail called "trurl" that is a headless system on which I don't want to use X11.  I also don't want to use CUPS for that matter.  So, in its "trurl-make.conf" file I include this line:

OPTIONS_UNSET_FORCE= X11 CUPS


That will force those options off for all ports.  The result is I don't get any ports built supporting those options.

I guess it's not foolproof, but it seems to work well enough for me.

I hope this helps.

Cheers,

Paul.