Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 20:10:33 -0500 From: Stephen Montgomery-Smith <stephen@missouri.edu> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: Thomas Rasmussen <thomas@gibfest.dk>, "freebsd-ports@freebsd.org" <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Manually registering dependencies for ports Message-ID: <4C0C4709.5000504@missouri.edu> In-Reply-To: <4C0C43A3.6050100@missouri.edu> References: <4C0C34FC.4030603@gibfest.dk> <4C0C3A5B.8010707@missouri.edu> <4C0C3D5F.2070204@FreeBSD.org> <4C0C403B.4000005@missouri.edu> <4C0C4306.205@FreeBSD.org> <4C0C43A3.6050100@missouri.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: > Doug Barton wrote: >> On 06/06/10 17:41, Stephen Montgomery-Smith wrote: >>> >>> Well, in my mind, when I sent the message, I was somewhat sure it would >>> work, at least that it would pass some kind of quick test. >> >> In other words, you guessed, and your guess was wrong. > > I did guess, and it seems that I was wrong. This completely surprised > me. My apologies. You are right and I was wrong. OK, after that appropriate chastising, let me try again. This time I did test it. So, suppose you have a script xxx that uses port yyy. So this will work: echo xxx >> /var/db/pkg/yyy/+REQUIRED_BY mkdir /var/db/pkg/xxx touch /var/db/pkg/xxx/+CONTENTS On the other hand, this will cause programs like pkg_info and pkg_version to get out of sorts. And I guess if you use programs like port-upgrade (which I don't), who knows what damage this might cause. So --- this is what I would do. If I had a set of scripts that I wanted to install, I would write my own local port whose job is to install the scripts, and which lists the needed dependencies as RUN_DEPENDS.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C0C4709.5000504>