Scott Ullrich wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Angelo Turetta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
For example, a lot of files in the 20080624 appear to have an bogus
additional prefix '/usr/local/pfsense-bin'. Removing that prefix from the
listing and re-sorting (see '20080624-corrected.txt') the diff begins to
make some sense, but it's still huge: to me it seems like most ports were
not installed at all.
This is how the new system works. It installs all pfPorts to
/usr/local/pfsense-bin to separate out the host binaries from the
pfSense binaries. The system then uses the newly added copy lists to
builder_scripts to copy the binaries and such to the builder staging
area.
Separate host from pfSense? You mean during build or in the resulting image?
Maybe I'm dumb, but I can't understand why the binaries that compose the
base pfSense image should be installed on a non-standard prefix.
That would be acceptable if we speak about optional packages, so that
upgrades of the base system cannot be messed up by installed ports.
And this does not explain why the pfPorts should be missing from the
image, I cannot understand why this would depend on FreeBSD6
Angelo Turetta
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
