Using ports, want to migrate to packages

[arapaima]

I've always been using ports to install software on my FreeBSD computers.
I recently read up on pkgng which looks really nice and somewhat similar to the behavior of different package managers I use on GNU/Linux systems.
I've been told that mixing ports and packages is looking for problems.
Most of my ports is compiled without configuration options, and if I would need to do this in the future I guess 'make package' would do the trick.
So, is their a way to migrate to the use of packages instead? I got about 130 ports installed at the moment.
Am I required to deinstall everything and reinstall by using pkng?
Other suggestions?

 

[SirDice]

I've been told that mixing ports and packages is looking for problems.

This is not really true. Packages are nothing more than pre-compiled ports. The cause of the problems is usually a mixup of versions.

Most of my ports is compiled without configuration options, and if I would need to do this in the future I guess 'make package' would do the trick.

make package creates a package from a port, it does not install one.

Am I required to deinstall everything and reinstall by using pkng?

Nope, just start using it.

 

[arapaima]

Great news!

So I guess this would be a appropriate way of doing this

cd /usr/ports/dir/foo
make config
make package
pkg add ./foo.txz

 

[SirDice]

make package
pkg add ./foo.txz

Assuming you're using PKGNG and have WITH_PKGNG="YES" in /etc/make.conf.

Also note that make package runs after make install.

 

[arapaima]

Hm, so what you're saying is that WITH_PKGNG="YES" will affect ports in a way of building packages instead of the normal behavior?

 

[SirDice]

Hm, so what you're saying is that WITH_PKGNG="YES" will affect ports in a way of building packages instead of the normal behavior?

Yes, if WITH_PKGNG=YES is set make package will create a PKGNG package. If it's not defined it'll resort to the 'standard' pkg_* commands.

Mixing pkg_* and pkg * is really not a good idea