current -> ports On 07/16/2011 09:02 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
Unless say, you're doing package installation outside of a chroot/jail, to populate something inside a chroot/jail before you start said chroot/jail.
I can see "-P" and "-p" working for those many ports which just put programs in place. But there are some ports that include installation programs as part of the software. And some ports (like octave) which have a program which sometimes acts as an installation script, and sometimes acts as a user program. And sometimes those installation programs install for the port, and sometimes they install for a subport.
If we are to continue using the "-P" and "-p" options, I suggest someone does the following:
1. Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, for example?
2. Set up a computer that tests each package to see if it is "-P" compliant and "-p" compliant. By the way, each should be tested separately. For example, suppose latex-pgf is installed with the "-p" option. Then does it expect mktexlsr to be in the directory it is installing into, or the regular directory? mktexlsr is installed by a dependency, so the package needs to know where to find it. It would seem to me that you need a PKG_LOCALBASE variable as well as a PKG_PREFIX variable, so that the port knows where to find these installation programs.
3. Add a flag to ports that allow the port maintainer to mark the port "-p" non-compliant and "-P" non-compliant.
The other possibility is to add to the man page of pkg_add saying that there is a good chance the "-p" and "-P" options don't work properly. Some people have clearly indicated that they like and use these options, so let's keep them happy too, and not delete it altogether.
Stephen _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
