> > > Sometimes o/c a package cmmi skips creation/&c of a particular
> > > '(path,type,contents,permissions,ownerships,...)' item, because it sees
> > > that such an item already exists: the latter may have come from
> > > an earlier version of the package, or from a different package, or
> > > somewhere else.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Does pio list that the current cmmi package (joint-)owns that item ?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > akh
> > > 
> 
> 
> Am not sure if any of your below, addresses the question above.
> 
> 
> Could you clarify please what is the answer to the question? Thanks.
> 

Perhaps I don't understand your question, or you haven't considered the way a 
timestamper works.  Timestampers are simple, very Unix-like.  ;-)  pio is 
nothing as ambitious as any of the major distros' package managers.  It doesn't 
"build" anything, doesn't want to know how!  All it knows is what files were 
added, removed, or touched between two points in time.  Turns out, that is 
enough, if used properly.  pio won't save one from oneself!  One has to be 
orderly.

"...earlier versions of the package..."  Not a problem, remove them first, 
don't overlay.  For example, if you want to upgrade nano-2.0.6 to 2.3.2, you 
create a new build script with your existing nano, remove 2.0.6 and install 
2.3.2, clean.  If 2.3.2 blows up, remove it and restore 2.0.6, as you were.  
Have your own special nanorc you want to use, install it when pio isn't 
watching.  pio should only be watching the default package builds.

The one place where I allow any overlays is in kernel customizations.  My 
kern-build script appends the version number to the kernel directory name and 
gives that to pio as the name of what is being built.  So if I'm trying to get 
a kernel I like and I make *-5, try it, decide I don't like it, -4, or -3, I 
remove -5, restore -4, remove -4, restore -3, remove -3, restore -2, backing 
everything out step by step as it got made.  Then I can start from -2 to try a 
different approach to -3.  But remember, pio never deleted any of those three 
backups I made.  When I tell it to backup the new -3, it asks if I want to 
overwrite the one already there.  Yes.  -4 & -5 are now from a branch that got 
sawed off, so they should be deleted by hand.  But in a wierd emergency, I 
could run tar on one and get some kind of kernel back.

pio does know an existing file was touched--it saw the file's timestamp 
changed--that's what a timestamper does.  In the removal script that goes as "# 
rm -f filename", so it isn't removed with the rest of the package--"It isn't 
'mine'".  It's content could have changed, but pio doesn't know or care.  pio 
doesn't diff--that's not what a timestamper does.  But if one runs backups of 
every package as installed, as one certainly should, then once one examines the 
situation, one can run tar to restore just that one file.  (I examined if it 
was feasible to automatically restore changed files and decided it's not.  
Circular unchanges are possible.)

pio works, if one understands how, and uses it in a manner that lets it see 
what the proper state of installation is.

> 
> I understand about removal/--help/&c&c (incl did go and read the script
> & related materials): but you say about listing of package contents;
> and I am not sure that it is not prone to getting it wrong.
> 

I've been using it successfully since LFS-4.1.  What more can I say?

> 
> (Please wrap your lines to max ~80 chars per b/lfs mailing-lists
> requested netiquette.)
> 

My server's email client doesn't have that option any longer.

-- 
Paul Rogers
[email protected]
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to