From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 9 12:56:53 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D40106567D for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 12:56:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.hackers@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net (rachie.is-a-geek.net [66.230.99.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 543408FC12 for ; Fri, 9 May 2008 12:56:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.hackers@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF1121CD4A; Fri, 9 May 2008 04:40:37 -0800 (AKDT) From: Mel To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 14:40:35 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200805091440.36202.fbsd.hackers@rachie.is-a-geek.net> Cc: Anders Nore Subject: Re: Adding .db support to pkg_tools X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 May 2008 12:56:53 -0000 On Friday 09 May 2008 13:52:46 Anders Nore wrote: > I'm working on adding .db support to the pkg_tools( i.e. pkg_add, > pkg_info, etc. ) as part of SoC 2008. Is this gonna be optional? > One problem lies with the +* files which is scripts (e.g., +INSTALL, > +DEINSTALL). I've gotten some input that it's bad to save scripts in the > db, but if it's not going to be saved there, then where? Isn't it possible > to execute a script without saving a file to disk? Like using "sh -c > 'string'". In my personal opinion it should not be a hybrid solution where > you save the script files in an old fashion way, for example > /var/db/pkg/someport-1.2_1/+INSTALL, and the rest of the information lies > in the .db file. Because then you have redundancy and that could lead to > inconsistencies. Don't know what the reasons are for people to say it's bad to save scripts in the db, but for me it would be that I can't inspect and/or modify them, though if there were support in the ports for PKG(DE)INSTALL_LOCAL, I suppose I could do without the modification part. -- Mel