On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 02:05:25PM +0200, Andreas Hauser wrote:
csaba.henk wrote @ 17 Aug 2006 05:52:41 GMT:
them). They let everything meddle in the basic /{usr/,}{{s,}bin,lib}
hierarchy and that's a very bad idea IMHO. Especially on BSD.
Use a chroot. Pacman can do this via an option
use / and accept
that parts of base get overwritten, which gets less of a problem the
more of base is converted to pacman.
--
Andy
Whatever it may be, I like pacman, bash and all the other shells out there.
Archlinux has many packages in its repository that require patching as
well. This shouldn't be a giant hurdle. The thing is it would kind of
be neat to write scripts in a different shell. This would also give
it to DFly, so I think its better to put effort in
pkgsrc than in alternatives.
Pieter
On 8/16/06, Vivek Ayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatever it may be, I like pacman, bash and all the other shells out there.
Archlinux has many packages in its repository that require patching as
well
On 8/16/06, Gergo Szakal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TBH, I don't see why have ports for FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Gentoo and
whatever, why not make a system that has many packages for many OS's.
Well, that is exactly the goal of both pkgsrc and portage, isn't it ?
(Both are meant to be portable over
On 2006-08-16, Vivek Ayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatever it may be, I like pacman, bash and all the other shells out there.
Archlinux has many packages in its repository that require patching as
well. This shouldn't be a giant hurdle. The thing is it would kind of
be neat to write scripts
On 2006-08-16, Gergo Szakal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
TBH, I don't see why have ports for FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Gentoo and
whatever, why not make a system that has many packages for many OS's.
Having used FreeBSD a lot, using OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD now, I don't
understand why their package
Csaba Henk wrote:
{...}
Have you tried, eg. pkgmanager (that said, it's in wip, not pkgtools?
I just happened to try it tonight, but it doesn't seem to work out (on
Linux, not Dfly). Anyway, it's not a reason to give it up... it looks
fine...
I have settled on wip/pkgmanager as my primary
On 2006-08-16, Pieter Dumon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, that is exactly the goal of both pkgsrc and portage, isn't it ?
(Both are meant to be portable over /runnable on any OS AND
architecture).
Gentoo Portage has a very BSD-ish philosophy (except for being GPL),
and it has some 1000s of
Am 15.08.2006 um 21:02 schrieb Vivek Ayer:
However, the only awkward thing is the bash script used.
Hmm. You are the second person considering bash as evil. What might
be the reason for this?
Markus
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dipl. Ing. Markus Hitter
http://www.jump-ing.de/
create some problems (like pacman using bash-
scripts instead of sh-scripts).
--
Erik Wikström
: Am 15.08.2006 um 21:02 schrieb Vivek Ayer:
:
: However, the only awkward thing is the bash script used.
:
: Hmm. You are the second person considering bash as evil. What might be the
: reason for this?
:
:The problem is the licensing. Many BSD users prefer that essential or
:standard
bastyaelvtars wrote @ Mon, 14 Aug 2006 17:54:55 +0200:
Yeah, it's me again. I have read the according wikipage and read info
about pacman as well and it looks good. Now I would like to ask whether
it conflicts with pkgsrc, and if so, will there be resolution, and
whether integration
erik-wikstrom wrote @ Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:43:12 +0200:
On 2006-08-14 17:54, Gergo Szakal wrote:
Yeah, it's me again. I have read the according wikipage and read info
about pacman as well and it looks good. Now I would like to ask whether
it conflicts with pkgsrc, and if so
On 2006-08-14 19:20, Francis Gudin wrote:
On 14-08-2006, Erik Wikström [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Haven't looked at pacman but I seem to recall that it's a utility for
managing pkgsrc packages and as such it (probably) used the pkgsrc
infrastructure to perform it's magic. Thus it ought to work
15 matches
Mail list logo
