Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 17:00:26 +0200 From: Miroslav Lachman <000.fbsd@quip.cz> To: ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [HEADSUP] Staging, packaging and more / side effect Message-ID: <5250298A.8090806@quip.cz> In-Reply-To: <20131003084814.GB99713@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> References: <20131003084814.GB99713@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Baptiste Daroussin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I want to give to all porters infomations on the rationnale behind all the changes,
> to explain why some things has happened, the rationale behind what we still need
> to do to get the ports tree into a modern binary world.
>
> 1/ Staging
>
> You may has notice that staging has hit the ports tree, staging is something
> really important, all packages system are using that feature for eons, sometime
> called DESTDIR sometime called FAKEDIR.
>
> Staging is consistent in adding a new step while building packages: install
> everything into ${STAGEDIR}. Then we can directly create packages out of that
> directory without having to install into /. What the implementation does is:
> With pkg_install (legacy package tools):
> - Create a package from the stage directory
> - Install that package.
I appreciate staging (long-awaited feature). I think that it should be
advertised longer befor it hits the tree with explanation of all changes
and side effects.
I was hit by one minor problem today - I used "make package clean" in
ports dir to install some port and have it in binary package for backup
at the same time. This doesn't work any more.
Binary package is created and saved in /usr/ports/packages/All, but port
is not installed.
I know this is intended but it takes me a few moments before I solved
the issue "why the port is not installed?", so I need to change my
workflow from now.
Miroslav Lachman
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5250298A.8090806>