Date: Sat, 8 May 2010 20:44:08 -0700 From: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> To: portmgr@freebsd.org Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Deprecate @srcdir in pkg_install manifests Message-ID: <q2u7d6fde3d1005082044j37122be8l58390c3cbfe67fd7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <y2s7d6fde3d1005082025y967e76e2n99322c71ec0cb99a@mail.gmail.com> References: <y2s7d6fde3d1005082025y967e76e2n99322c71ec0cb99a@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Arch and Portmgr,
> =A0 =A0Found another item that I'm proposing for removal -- @srcdir. Now,
> first off, here's what it does (from pkg_create):
>
> =A0 =A0 @srcdir directory
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 Set the internal directory pointer for _creation =
only_ to
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 directory. =A0That is to say that it overrides @c=
wd for package
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 creation but not extraction.
>
> This construct:
>
> 1. Isn't used anywhere in /usr/ports's pkg_plist* files.
> 2. Isn't used in /usr/src .
> 3. Is semi-broken in pkg_create as it's treated as a really awkward
> special case, like so:
>
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0else if (p->type =3D=3D PLIST_CWD || p->type =3D=3D PLIST_=
SRC)
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0fprintf(totar, "-C\n%s\n", p->name);
>
> =A0 =A0So if I specify @srcdir multiple times, pkg_create will fall in on=
itself.
> 4. It over-complicates things, as the -p option basically already sort
Correction -- -s and -S handle this functionality:
-s srcdir
srcdir will override the value of @cwd during package creation=
.
-S basedir
basedir will be prefixed to all @cwd during package creation.
> of provides this level of functionality; the only pro for doing this
> that I can think of is if someone had tainted vs untainted files that
> they wanted to install, then using @srcdir with a custom manifest and
> directory would simplify things. I argue that if they're doing that,
> they should be using a chroot or a jail anyhow because package
> maintainers would potentially unnecessarily taint the system with
> their environment and the packages wouldn't be necessarily as safe to
> redistribute.
> =A0 =A0Another item I'll be talking about with flz and other folks at
> BSDCan, but I wanted to see if anyone had any concerns that they
> needed to air here before a final decision was made by portmgr.
Thanks,
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?q2u7d6fde3d1005082044j37122be8l58390c3cbfe67fd7>