Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 17:35:43 +0000 From: Chris Rees <utisoft@googlemail.com> To: Chris Telting <christopher-ml@telting.org> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: spreculative: /bin2 & /usr/bin2 and alternative package/ports trees? Message-ID: <b79ecaef1003020935q27d7d608i67f2fcde1510fca0@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4B8BF6E3.3040009@telting.org> References: <4B8BF6E3.3040009@telting.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 March 2010 17:18, Chris Telting <christopher-ml@telting.org> wrote: > Just wondering if anyone cares to share their thoughts about this. > > There are a few ports that I would love to see included in the base tree > such as OpenLDAP and the Openbsd pdksh or bash. =A0But It hasn't happened= and > isn't likely to happen. =A0So I was thinking about the pkg infrastructure= . > =A0The location of the pkg file database I believe can be specified. =A0A= nd the > installation directories I believe can also be specified. =A0Other than t= hat > paths would have to be changed for binaries and libraries and probably sh= are > and other installation points. > > This should allow separate package trees meaning that when I delete and > reinstall my main ports these programs will not be affected and the packa= ge > database info for these will not be screwed up. > > Is it possible and if it is has anyone implemented it on their own system= s? > > Or have people simply taken to installing ports in the main directories? > > > Chris Why does it make a difference with the prefix on where you put them? You shouldn't manually delete ports, anyway. You should deinstall them using the port... Chris
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?b79ecaef1003020935q27d7d608i67f2fcde1510fca0>