Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 14 Feb 2010 14:20:08 -0800
From:      Darren Pilgrim <freebsd@bitfreak.org>
To:        Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com>
Cc:        ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Installing a different PORTVERSION based on OSVERSION?
Message-ID:  <4B787718.3040605@bitfreak.org>
In-Reply-To: <7d6fde3d1002141348q1facadd4l5b11b4749379d49f@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <4B776D6F.10008@bitfreak.org>	 <20100214180243.GA79050@atarininja.org>	 <4B7863FE.9040108@bitfreak.org> <7d6fde3d1002141348q1facadd4l5b11b4749379d49f@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Garrett Cooper wrote:
>     Vendor provided binaries are a fun ball of wax to deal with
> because you need to have all dependencies come from the same generic
> pool as the package [/ port] itself, as any
>     This sounds trivial, but it requires changes to pkg_add (for
> fetching / installing a particular revision of the code, as well as
> `slotting' the packages themselves), determining elf-version, ld
> modifications, as well as a few other things. It's been implemented at
> my work [Ironport] from what I've been told, but 1) I'm not sure how
> complete it is, 2) I'm not sure how tested it is, and 3) it hasn't
> been reviewed yet and I'm not sure how much would be put back in the
> community at large to be honest...

Or you can take the vendor's approach and make a static binary with all 
the dependencies (i.e., libraries) compiled in.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B787718.3040605>