Date: Mon, 20 Nov 1995 05:53:02 -0800 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal 3: Non-executable file in *_DEPEND Message-ID: <199511201353.FAA01006@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199511201305.NAA19646@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> (message from Michael Smith on Mon, 20 Nov 1995 13:05:27 %2B0000 ())
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Can we have one then? 8) On the basis of :
*
* for item in PKG_DEPENDS
* if item not installed and package available
* install package, continue
* if item not installed and port available
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is the hard part. There is no easy way to get this mapping,
unlike port -> package. The only file that contains this,
/usr/ports/INDEX, is often out of date, not only because of my
laziness, but also because we can't expect the users to grab that file
off the ftp site too often.
* install port, continue
* complain
*
* Seriously, I understand that this is hardly going to happen overnight; I'm
* just looking to stir up a bit of discussion as the whole prepackaged thing
* is the current bee in my bonnet 8)
Actually, if we allow make to go into the port dir and find the
package name, it is not too difficult to implement as an extension of
the current scheme. All we need is an extra check in the "not
installed, ok I'll go build the port" part of the dependency part to
see if the package exists and use that instead.
* My thinking is prompted by the recent questions wrt. the new fvwm port -
* I'm fairly sure that it would have compiled fine against any recent
* version of xpm, but because the xpm version was bumped in the interim,
* some confusion ensued.
That confusion was caused because the fvwm port had an old
"requirements" script that was used to do the dependency checking
manually, before the *_DEPENDS were introduced. It won't happen any
more, at least in that form.
* Sometime when I have a keyboard I can actually find the keys on, I'll try
* to put some coherent thoughts together. I spent a little time recently
* looking at how the RedHat Linux people do things. They're a little more
* rigid in their pacakge definition rules, but the "rpm" tools looked
* fairly similar in feature set to the pkg_* tools, so I tinkered with
* their graphical front end with a vague idea to making it work under FreeBSD.
That's very cool.
* They have some interesting ideas, but their code is pretty awful.
;)
* Because a hypothetical interactive installer will pop up a dialog and say
Yeah, that will be nice....
* It would also be nice if _everything_ was listed in the PLIST file,
* rather than the current shorthand of listing only directories which contain
* files specific to the package. This breaks with things like Tcl/Tk, where
This is already recommended, although not mandatory. I'm planning tho
bring this up as "proposal 5" or something. :)
Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511201353.FAA01006>