Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com
Re: RFC: changes to ports infrastructure

From: Joachim Schipper (joachimjoachimschipper.nl)
Date: Thu Aug 19 2010 - 09:02:25 CDT

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 03:06:09PM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 02:46:44PM +0200, Joachim Schipper wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:55:22AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> > > I want to tweak the directory structure for ports.

> > > Did I miss anything ?
> >
> > [Y]ou can't really
> > install a partial ports tree. If all modules were kept in e.g.
> > ports/infrastructure/modules, it may be possible to install only a
> > hypothetical ports-infrastructure.tar.gz (like sys.tar.gz, but for
> > ports) and a couple of individual ports (e.g. under mystuff/).
> >
> > This would make it very easy to upgrade just one package on a -stable
> > system.
> No-go. You also need proper depends to compute default pkgnames for the
> package, so you mostly need the full ports tree anyways.

Yeah, hadn't thought of that. Deriving that information only from
installed packages is probably not feasible.

> And modules was specifically designed to be modular, with no central place...
> I *could* have bsd.port.mk auto-checkout directories when needed with a
> specific cvs script,
> But considering the small size of the ports tree, it is probably one more
> useless feature.
> though.

I admit, that wouldn't be too useful.

Sorry for bothering you!


TFMotD: motd (5) - message of the day