Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:14:23 -0600 From: Gary Aitken <freebsd@dreamchaser.org> To: Kimmo Paasiala <kpaasial@gmail.com> Cc: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Mailing List <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: portmaster -- preserving added files? Message-ID: <5244878F.6090203@dreamchaser.org> In-Reply-To: <CA%2B7WWSeqwwhShJRNWy8=yt1hbjeEL8TL5nubaMJu0hZYieW_qQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <5244625E.3070108@dreamchaser.org> <CACdU%2Bf_o74uCw44qKH6RV4poufY0mRMRd903djyNQP7DgHu7tw@mail.gmail.com> <CA%2B7WWSeqwwhShJRNWy8=yt1hbjeEL8TL5nubaMJu0hZYieW_qQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09/26/13 12:39, Kimmo Paasiala wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Gary Aitken <freebsd@dreamchaser.org> wrote: >>> Is portmaster supposed to retain files which it did not install when updating / >>> reinstalling a port? >>> >>> For example, jave extensions are normally installed by placing a jar file in >>> /usr/local/openjdk6/jre/lib/ext/ >>> >>> When reinstalling, these are wiped out. <snip> >> The problem is not with portmaster, as it runs the pkg or pkg_install >> commands to remove the port. If you have files that are missing after >> uninstalling a port, then you'll need to check what that port is >> doing. Most likely the port has a @dirrm instead of an @dirrmtry for >> that directory in it's pkg-plist file. >> >> I had a look at the java/openjdk6/Makefile, and it creates the list of >> directories to remove with @dirrm instead of @dirrmtry. So it looks >> like the issue is with java/openjdk6 removing that directory. <snip> > It's a larger problem with no clear solution. What the programs that > install additional files after the initial installation should do is > to use /var/db/xyz for the additional files so that they are contained > in a separate directory alltogether. <snip> That presumes all additional files are installed via the ports mechanism, or at least know about it, which is highly unlikely. With plugins of various types and machine-independent binaries like java .class files abounding, requiring every add-on to be installed by the ports mechanism isn't likely to work in the long run. I can see how a program installed by the ports mechanism should use the mechanism you're advocating, but I don't think it applies to all cases. In this case, it was a mysql driver, obtained as a binary (.jar of java .class files). But things like gimp plugins have the same issue. Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5244878F.6090203>