:!: This page is of historical interest only. These days, the recommended technology is poudriere.

There are various solutions used in building multiple packages for FreeBSD. In a perfect world these would all be based on the same code as a reusable toolkit. In the meantime, here is an overall summary of what each one supports.

Project Also Known As Maintainer Source Code
pointyhat (old) Package Building Cluster portmgr pointyhat repo
tinderbox Ports Tinderbox, MarcusCom tinderbox Joe Marcus Clarke tinderbox repo
redports Bernhard Froehlich redports repo
poudriere Baptiste Daroussin & Bryan Drewery poudriere repo

:!: The ports tinderbox is a completely different codebase than the src tinderbox. On occasion you will hear people just refer to tinderbox. You will have to figure out from context which one they mean.

Project cmdline? UI? entire tree? partial tree? single port? -incremental? distributed? multiarch?
pointyhat only N Y Y Y Y Y Y
tinderbox Y web-based Y Y Y Y N Y
redports svn Y N Y Y Y Y Y
poudriere only web-based Y Y Y Y N Y
Project strengths weaknesses comments
pointyhat whole trees, incremental runs fragile, hard to set up best for building whole trees
tinderbox good documentation, web-based UI, turnkey, available in ports as ports-mgmt/tinderbox not distributed best for individual user installations
redports public service, multiuser, modern user interface, many environments Can take a long time as the queue gets backed up. package building uses ports tinderbox
poudriere Fast, incremental, jails, no deps (using jail,sh,ZFS[optional]), easy to setup and use, easy to run customized build. Supports cross arch and release builds. Highly tested with PKGNG. Builds packages in parallel. Overview

  • freebsdpackagebuildingcomparison.txt
  • Last modified: 2026/10/12 10:55
  • (external edit)