[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: crux
Subject: Re: Pkgfile.local sucks(?)
From: Florian Weber <Florian.Weber () pfaffenhofen ! de>
Date: 2002-06-10 22:17:53
[Download RAW message or body]
On Monday 10 June 2002 23:34, Markus Ackermann wrote:
> On Mon 10.06.2002, 23:21:49 +0200, Per Liden said in public:
> >Keep your ports in some directory, say ~/ports/.
>
> or /usr/local/ports... isn't that what "local" is all about?
Well .. yes. But I still agree with Per.
IMVHO, /usr/ports is a very unique structure (compared to, say,
"..../bin/....") and should be kept in one place.
> >Comments?
Per: do you think you can come up with a way to make the "local" tree
(semi-)automatically override the original tree(s)? Perhaps with an option to
pkgmk, if you don't like magic? Otherwise a recursive pkgmk could wreak havoc
on a system.
Perhaps (as said before) duplicate "/usr/ports/XXXX" in
"/usr/ports/local/XXXX", with XXXX={base,opt,contrib}
To give an elaborate example:
/usr/ports
base/
opt/
contrib/
local/
base/
opt/
contrib/
my-very-new-port/
yet-another-port/
my-kde/
kdelibs/
kdebase/
Florian
who thinks this local tree is a great idea
--
PGP key ID: 1F198651
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic