Date: Tue, 25 Apr 1995 17:57:05 -0700 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami | =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCQHUbKEI=?= =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCOCsbKEIgGyRCOC0bKEI=?=) To: thomas@ghpc8.ihf.rwth-aachen.de Cc: thomas@ghpc8.ihf.rwth-aachen.de, scott@statsci.com, gpalmer@cdrom.com, jkh@freefall.cdrom.com, nwestfal@indigo.csci.csusb.edu, ports@freefall.cdrom.com Subject: Re: /usr/ports/distfiles - did I screw the pooch here? Message-ID: <199504260057.RAA07693@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <199504251345.PAA25760@ghpc6.ihf.rwth-aachen.de> (message from Thomas Gellekum on Tue, 25 Apr 1995 15:45:42 %2B0200 (MET DST))
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Correct me if I'm wrong, but at least this subthread was about the
* possibility to grab ports/ on any old ftp site with `get
* ports.tar.gz' and without getting all the distfiles, no?
Yes.
* Someone (Jordan?) suggested using symlinks to keep the distfiles
Satoshi :)
* out of ports/
I suggested to do that on ftp.freebsd.org, not on the user's disks.
* and I think we have established now that this won't
* work due to the configuration of some (many?) sites.
I'm not sure, how many ftp sites out there have this configuration?
If there aren't that many, it may not be worth the hassle. I still
think it's better if we can keep it in ports.
* I think one
* possible solution is having two different directories, one for the
* ports, one for the tarballs. Of course you're right, where the user
* keeps zir files _is_ irrelevant, but we'd have to decide on one
* setup and let the user override it, if desired.
Nono, what I'm saying that DISTDIR and the last two components of the
default MASTER_SITES are irrelevant. We can set the default
MASTER_SITES to ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/oh/my/distfiles/ and
have it still work without ever touching DISTDIR.
* OK, in the scheme above (two dirs) MASTER_SITES would be
* ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/distfiles;
* ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/ports would only contain the port
* subdirs. For easy setup I'd be using the same layout (at least as a
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I don't understand what this means....
* default) on the users disk (on the CD, in the distribution, ...),
* overridable through ${DISTFILES} (which could be a path with a
* default value of (in my scheme)
You mean DISTDIR. DISTFILES is the "foo.tar.gz" sort of thing, not a
directory name. (Well, Jordan has been punching me to change this to
DISTPATH.)
* /usr/distfiles:/usr/local/distfiles:${HOME}/distfiles). If the user
* wants the same directory layout as in 2.0R, zie is free to link
* /usr/ports/distfiles -> /usr/distfiles or set ${DISTFILES} directly.
I am strongly against /usr/distfiles. We already have enough
directories under /usr, and distfiles/ clearly belongs to /usr/ports.
Plus, this doesn't have to do anything with the problem at hand!
* Having said all this I just hope I'm not too far off the discussion
* with my comments...
Other than confusing MASTER_SITES and DISTDIR, I think you are doing
very fine. :)
Anyway, so the question is, how many ftp sites out there have tars
that follow symlinks? If there is any major mirror site that does it,
I'll go fix bsd.port.mk so we can ship the new version with 2.0.3.
Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504260057.RAA07693>