Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 12:45:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Melvyn Sopacua <melvyn@magemana.nl> To: marino@freebsd.org Cc: Kevin Oberman <rkoberman@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Ports mailing list <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>, Jakob Breivik Grimstveit <jakob@grimstveit.no> Subject: Re: Repair pkgng Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404101219010.57365@fire.magemana.nl> In-Reply-To: <534590B7.8050805@marino.st> References: <CAFVH1KULq8wfn4HDTE6L6v5hg0XQhYZFOj4QVfsCVUMZ9hTKGw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404082141290.61221@fire.magemana.nl> <CAN6yY1tAUuua5CsrZOgVnLZrk88rzFqNMi2opakejPPExROcSA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404091234120.72830@fire.magemana.nl> <534527D6.5000802@marino.st> <CAN6yY1snD6=aHLz8CPbBY_SdRYomfR4wFz0fBhYmFwLPikWMNw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1404092014390.2238@fire.magemana.nl> <534590B7.8050805@marino.st>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, On Wed, 9 Apr 2014, John Marino wrote: >> This still doesn't make sense. Distfiles are of no concern to binary >> packages, so why would I continue to clutter /var/db/pkg with a large >> tree of directories that is then duplicated to /var/db/ports? >> What problem in portmaster or the options framework was solved by moving >> this? > > If the portmaster-created "distfiles" bother you, stop using portmaster, > perhaps? It seems superfluous to me anyway; I don't get why people feel > they need it with pkg. I already did a while back. Yet, it's still the recommended tool in the handbook if I'm not mistaken. FreeBSD has also always adhered to a sensible hier(7), which portmaster is now breaking. > > IFAIK, options has always been in /var/db/ports, this is not new. It > didn't get moved. Correct. Portmaster moved it's distfiles file. > I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with the "what problem was > solved" line of questioning. If it were moved, are you trying to get it > moved back? What's the goal here? Yeah. One of the advantages and early implementation goals of pkg(1) was to reduce clutter in /var/db/pkg. Secondly, 70-80% of common ports now use an options file (think DOCS, EXAMPLES, NLS), so the chance that /var/db/ports/portname already exists is pretty high. Why then reintroduce files/directories in /var/db/pkg that affect both port building and deployment? I don't understand what the upside to this change in portmaster is and thus assume that it solved an issue. -- Melvyn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1404101219010.57365>