From owner-freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Wed Oct 14 18:44:54 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pkg@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFAD4A13AD9 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:44:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from baptiste.daroussin@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wi0-x22b.google.com (mail-wi0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8687AB8B for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:44:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from baptiste.daroussin@gmail.com) Received: by wicgb1 with SMTP id gb1so141850853wic.1 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:44:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=80o9AT7ujrApIOvxqalKT+gSrPLIG8bUY/0syGYw4B0=; b=jJSHhJ185Illoi9Xz1bm/izqiJfuJ+cZHmKVZETa33pOJkUIYEvKAj4AQjz9Nf+sNe p5rO17NB+Z6RGR1W5Zbp4KSwHhlQZPCEjTBxYs/l2o4jG/a3CFkygrTdnxmI1Vm2TPJc 4fO7bw2bm0xiTI55Yij2U54fXD/a8MM0OisBsbowX+g3f83tp5Zii7Z3UB4EiS2AYgKf cFFbriUzg4NIJect6x5uo1tKZuZzowmfjnxI4nPcqgWpDqhGKEabNIRmRmXS/n4JBgmg HBDmXMe7/1O3OWgXTPckatRL3iHsMJ23zJtIilbaRekzCWisoNtRERKtKaPweQf22QGc 6Ruw== X-Received: by 10.180.85.229 with SMTP id k5mr30622637wiz.76.1444848292106; Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ivaldir.etoilebsd.net ([2001:41d0:8:db4c::1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id he3sm11636779wjc.48.2015.10.14.11.44.51 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Baptiste Daroussin Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 20:44:49 +0200 From: Baptiste Daroussin To: vmunix.old@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: locked packages got upgraded anyway Message-ID: <20151014184449.GM55137@ivaldir.etoilebsd.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="JvUS8mwutKMHKosv" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-BeenThere: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Binary package management and package tools discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 18:44:54 -0000 --JvUS8mwutKMHKosv Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 08:24:01PM +0200, vmunix.old@gmail.com wrote: > * Mark Felder wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2015, at 17:42, Rainer Duffner wrote: > >> > >> > Am 14.10.2015 um 00:31 schrieb Benjamin Connelly : > >> > > >> > We have a few ports we compile with different compile time options t= han the FreeBSD binary repo, so we keep them locked. Last night when doing = some patching, we saw those locked packages get updated anyhow. For example= , pkg said all of these things on one system: > >> > > >> > >> > >> IMO, you either compile all of the packages you use yourself - or none. > >> > >> Until FreeBSD gets a sort of =E2=80=9Estable=E2=80=9C ports-tree that = lives for longer > >> than three months, running your own repo is almost a must for anything > >> even semi mission-critical. > >> > > > > He has a valid use case and I don't know why it was upgraded. Sounds > > like a bug. Perhaps because it was a dependency? Hmm... > > > > A planned* feature is for a user to be permitted to have packages with > > custom build options and "pkg upgrade" will handle fetching the required > > parts of the ports tree and building the updated package so you don't > > have to play this "lock your package, manually upgrade it later" game. > > Not everyone should be forced to run poudriere just so they can change > > one option on one package... > > > > * Planned as in "bapt or someone said we should do this when we have > > time" >=20 > Are there any plans to introduce sub-packages or "flavors"? Because that > would solve the issue of having to fiddle with Poudriere in order to build > packages with more options enabled once and for all for probably 99% of > all users. Yes there are plan for all of this but it takes a lot of time and we have v= ery little manpower. Best regards, Bapt --JvUS8mwutKMHKosv Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iEYEARECAAYFAlYeoqAACgkQ8kTtMUmk6Ewh+QCeIYe+B/c6oC6GQfveZE8I+16v jgoAn3wiMg7CcUeuA1ajIax8zlVJlw7K =j6xd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --JvUS8mwutKMHKosv--