Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 14:40:35 +0200 From: Mel <fbsd.hackers@rachie.is-a-geek.net> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: Anders Nore <andenore@start.no> Subject: Re: Adding .db support to pkg_tools Message-ID: <200805091440.36202.fbsd.hackers@rachie.is-a-geek.net> In-Reply-To: <op.uavxx8ip2n4ijf@duckjen.nextgentel.no> References: <op.uavxx8ip2n4ijf@duckjen.nextgentel.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200805091440.36202.fbsd.hackers>