Posted on by Justin Sherrill
New dports build on the way

Thanks to tuxillo and others, there’s a new build of dports on the way for DragonFly 5.4 that includes packages that weren’t building before – mongodb, kodi, mysql80, and I imagine more that I don’t know about.  If the synth build is still running when you read this, you can look at its status page.  If it isn’t running, the packages are of course in the normal place and you can use ‘pkg upgrade’ to get them.

9 Replies to “New dports build on the way”

  1. What’s the latest on dports?

    I thought the maintainer got booted by FreeBSD (or something like that) and created ravenports (?).

    What’s the official package manager for dfly?

  2. If one google/duck-duck-go searches “dragonflybsd dports” there are statements such as:
    “The dedicated application build system for DragonFly BSD” (from github)
    and there’s even documentation.
    https://www.dragonflybsd.org/docs/howtos/HowToDPorts/

    “official” pkg manager seems to be the “pkg” command, dports is more “this is the DragonflyBSD fork of the FreeBSD ports tree”.

  4. I disagree. What happens in FreeBSD commiter-land has little to no impact on Dragonfly that I’ve seen. Nor should it.
    Especially something that happened over a year ago.

  5. @mer

    John Marino Was the core / key developer of dports. How is that not relevant

  6. All of this is my opinion, based on me using FreeBSD and variants since FreeBSD 3.3 or so, reading mailing lists and being in the industry for a long time. It is not the official postion of anyone or anything.

    Because what happens between John and FreeBSD has no or should have no bearing on what happens between John and DragonflyBSD.

    The thread you reference is about John losing commit privs to FreeBSD. So what? He’s not the first to have a dispute with FreeBSD core team and lose them. It simply means he cannot commit directly to the FreeBSD repos.
    It does not mean “John can’t commit directly to FreeBSD so he has to abandon all work on dports”. It means he’s forked FreeBSD ports and he works on the fork. He can make changes available upstream, upstream can take them or not as they see fit.

    Exactly like DragonflyBSD is a fork of FreeBSD. Work gets done here, it’s made available to upstream and upstream can do or not do what they want.

    I’m not defending John, FreeBSD, DragonflyBSD or anyone/anything here. I just don’t see how a year old thread about someone loses their commit bit to FreeBSD ports affects anything to do with DragonflyBSD and dports.

    If I’m wrong, I’m sure Matt or Justin or someone official from DFBSD will say so. But my opinion, you’re trying to make a situation where none exists.

  7. @mer

    >>”Because what happens between John and FreeBSD has no or should have no bearing on what happens between John and DragonflyBSD.”

    Isn’t someone losing commit access to FreeBSD the exact reason why DragonflyBSD exists in the first place (because this also happened to Matt D 11 years ago).

    How can you say “what happens in FreeBSD has no baring on other communities”

  8. Last time because you seem to be deliberately missing what I’m saying.
    Your example of DragonflyBSD is exactly what I am saying: since DFBSD started, has a FreeBSD committer losing commit bit affected DFBSD? No, unless it gave more time to devote to DFBSD.

    Your last paragraph: that is not what I wrote. I wrote that what happens between John and FBSD should have no or has no bearing on what happens between John and DFBSD. Again, other than perhaps “more time”. Dports was a fork of FBSD ports tree. Still is.

    That’s it, nothing more from me.

Comments are closed.