Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Hello! On Wed, Mar 01, 2006 at 03:10:43PM +0100, Marc Espie wrote: [...] make search key= is more or less deprecated... What exact replacement do you have in eye for the use case of finding where in the ports tree a port is (i.e. if one actually wants to use a port rather than a package)? Kind regards, Hannah.
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Marc Espie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: make search key= is more or less deprecated... Interesting, So is /usr/ports/INDEX being dumped too at some point. Or will it still have listings showing dependancies and stuff?
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 07:01:26PM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: Hannah Schroeter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: X isn't in packages, but in simple tarballs. cd / ; for i in some/path/x*.tgz; do tar xvvzpf $i; done Configure if needed, run X. Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No. X is not a package. It is a file set, not part of the ports tree. Not to be argumentative but ratpoison is still dependant on it [them]. Seems that should be made apparent in the ports search output somehow eh? Well, you *are* under /usr/ports/x11... It could be argued that some output might be desirable here; but on the other hand, this would lead to lots of people asking on misc@ where this 'x' package can be found... Joachim
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
make search key= is more or less deprecated... What is the preffered make target now? Regards Edd
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 04:04:46PM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: Maybe I don't understand what the dependancy lines are supposed to do. I thought they would list any dependancies. I have no part of X installed so should I see some dependancies listed here? # make search key=ratpoison Port: ratpoison-1.3.0p1 Path: x11/ratpoison Info: minimal wm based on GNU screen Maint: William Yodlowsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Index: x11 L-deps: B-deps: R-deps: Archs: any I guess this means ratpoison is unbelievably lightweight, having no dependencies (other than X, of course). -Ray-
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Ray Lai [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have no part of X installed so should I see some dependancies listed here? # make search key=ratpoison Port: ratpoison-1.3.0p1 Path: x11/ratpoison Info: minimal wm based on GNU screen Maint: William Yodlowsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] Index: x11 L-deps: B-deps: R-deps: Archs: any I guess this means ratpoison is unbelievably lightweight, having no dependencies (other than X, of course). So shouldn't `X' appear as a dependancy? Or whatever package supplies X? Assuming I need to backup and get the installation package *x*.tgz. I'm not sure how to proceed. I've installed from a recent snapshot and then built from src to follow current. So what is the normal way to backup and get something basic like X?
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Hi! On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 05:00:53PM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: [...] So shouldn't `X' appear as a dependancy? Or whatever package supplies X? Assuming I need to backup and get the installation package *x*.tgz. I'm not sure how to proceed. I've installed from a recent snapshot and then built from src to follow current. So what is the normal way to backup and get something basic like X? X isn't in packages, but in simple tarballs. cd / ; for i in some/path/x*.tgz; do tar xvvzpf $i; done Configure if needed, run X. Kind regards, Hannah.
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Harry Putnam wrote: ... So shouldn't `X' appear as a dependancy? Or whatever package supplies X? No. X is not a package. It is a file set, not part of the ports tree. Assuming I need to backup and get the installation package *x*.tgz. I'm not sure how to proceed. http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq4.html#AddFileSet I've installed from a recent snapshot and then built from src to follow current. So what is the normal way to backup and get something basic like X? Get the X files from a snapshot, install those as above. Or, boot an install media, install all file sets. Nick.
Re: Dependancies with make search key=
Hannah Schroeter [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: X isn't in packages, but in simple tarballs. cd / ; for i in some/path/x*.tgz; do tar xvvzpf $i; done Configure if needed, run X. Nick Holland [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No. X is not a package. It is a file set, not part of the ports tree. Not to be argumentative but ratpoison is still dependant on it [them]. Seems that should be made apparent in the ports search output somehow eh? Get the X files from a snapshot, install those as above. Or, boot an install media, install all file sets. Thanks for the tips.
