> While maybe the manuals could give more of a clue about where to find
> these scripts, this doesn't seem a good way to do it, it still doesn't
> say where to find them, and surely it's self evident that you need the
> ports tree to be able to build the ports tree?

I did have ports tree at the time when I faced this problem but I
couldn't infer from reading proot(1) that this tool is in inside of
the ports tree.

I agree that it may be much better to mention path to the proot binary
but I'm also afraid to introduce this new place of connection between
this man page and file structure of the ports tree.
Although maybe mentioning it in ports README file would be nice.
It already mentions proot and dpb but again, even though I opened this
README file I still couldn't infer that these tools are somewhere inside
of the "infrastructure/bin" folder of ports tree.

Also looking at the ports tree for the first time I can pretty confidently
guess that every folder is a category of programs so seeing
"infrastructure" folder there I think of infrastructure management
software (although I admit it can be learned behavior).
I would've never thought it's about ports infrastructure, which I think
is good to mention in ports main README file.

> if you need to build in a chroot jail

Yup, that's exactly what I'm trying to do. Just want to make sure I
don't pollute my system with build dependencies when I run "make".

I've spent some more time looking at the man pages and I see that
proot(1) mentions bsd.port.mk(5) which does in turn mention
infrastructure folder:

> bsd.port.mk also uses quite a few helper scripts which live under
> ${PORTSDIR}/infrastructure/bin.

Maybe I should spend time reading man pages more carefully. I think my
context on ports and how the build process work in OpenBSD is too mixed
up with FreeBSD and NetBSD as well as some Linux distros (the ones that
have some form of ports tree).
I'm happy to continue the discussion, maybe there is something to
improve but I agree on the fact that the change I proposed isn't great.

P.S.
I'm reading this list in marc.info and have no way to reply to messages
so I'm going to decode message-id from marc.info and try to compose new
email with "In-Reply-To" header. I hope it will come through correctly.
Apologies if it doesn't.