That's actually great news as the current setup script messes the ports database for people who have migrated to PKG NG.1) They've dropped pkg_add, replaced with "pkg".. so we'll need to re-learn how to create packages and re-do our installer (probably not too far off of the old method).
Maybe you could make lang/gcc48 a requirement? Clang is not a 100% compatible with ports.2) They've dropped gcc/g++ due to GPL issues, and replaced with "clang". Things compile differently now, extra hoops to jump through.
3) Dropped bind for ldns, not familiar with it. Likely still able to install it from ports, or via "pkg" (we have no plans to stop using bind)
# cd /usr/ports/dns/bind99/ && make install clean
# portmaster dns/bind99
# pkg install bind99
Unless Clang is a 100% compatible, it's totally unnecessary for DA to switch. It's just more work for nothing.Please use CLang and not gcc 4.8.
Clang is preferred because is used to build freebsd base and ports. I mean a FreeBSD admin (using 10.x) would rather prefer clang because from now on FreeBSD ports will work with Clang and even if are still some ports that cannot build right now with clang, in the near future they won't work with gcc.
Regarding bind, you can still use it, nobody care if is from base or port. It will be like the other apps that are from ports like mysql or apache.
As you might (or might not) notice, I am talking about FreeBSD 10.x.Unless Clang is a 100% compatible, it's totally unnecessary for DA to switch. It's just more work for nothing.
Ports will always compile using GCC. GCC is not going anywhere as that's what Linux distros use and that's what most libraries are developed on. Some FreeBSD patches in the future might only provide platform adjustment using clang specific options, but that should be easily fixable.
You misunderstood my post. I'm not talking about FreeBSD 10 users switching to CLANG, but about the extra work required by the DA team to make their scripts and apps work with Clang. That extra work is unnecessary as everything will always compile on GCC which is available via ports. And let's compare available compilers, not just what's in base. Clang 3.3 compiles some apps faster, but generates slower binaries than GCC 4.8, especially when compiling apps which require parallel processing. FreeBSD's move was purely motivated by GCC's license change, not because of performance issues.As you might (or might not) notice, I am talking about FreeBSD 10.x.
No problem, thank you for the updateNot at this time. The new DA release took priority, and the road blocks made us put it aside until we had more time to really dig in.
The DA binaries do work though, if anyone really wants an update.tar.gz for it.. but that's where the "working" bits come to an end.
I am not sure that in the future everything will always compile on GCC since they've switched to CLang.[...] That extra work is unnecessary as everything will always compile on GCC which is available via ports.
Yes and no. Yes, they've switched because of license. But because of license they're stuck with old version of GCC which is inferior in terms of compile time and running time performance to newer GCC (the one available from ports) and to Clang.FreeBSD's move was purely motivated by GCC's license change, not because of performance issues.
The FreeBSD foundation has, but the rest of the world (mostly) hasn't. Most software in ports is created by 3rd parties who check that their software compiles on the most used compiler: gcc.I am not sure that in the future everything will always compile on GCC since they've switched to CLang.
I agree, it would be nice, but that represents a lot of extra work to get CB to work with Clang, when sysadmins simply can install lang/gcc48 and get everything working out of the box right now.For me it does not matter the thing GCC vs Clang, but it would be very usefull to just get a FreeBSD and compile ports and rebuild DirectAdmin just using the compiled just came with FreeBSD.
Portsbuild sound interestingHi gang, I've been experimenting with a 100% ports-based installation system that co-exists with DirectAdmin for over 2 years now. I started working on a deployment script about 8-9 months ago, but recently took a pause on it as other projects took up my time. Basically, it replaces CustomBuild entirely and uses the FreeBSD Ports system to install services like Apache, exim, Dovecot and more. Additionally, I also plan to add multiple server setup & management in the future, where web & email servers are redundant (or load balancing) for a robust DirectAdmin-based solution, with very little modifications involved to DA's core.
Please don't take this as an official announcement, but I plan to call it PortsBuild and release it to the public when I've got something to show.