Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2012 23:21:34 +0200 From: Olli Hauer <ohauer@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [CFT] UNIQUENAME patches Message-ID: <4FDCF8DE.4070702@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4FDCEE4A.3020908@infracaninophile.co.uk> References: <4FD8AFEC.6070605@FreeBSD.org> <CADLo83-Pr5Qqa6oUFKmfbLuuDOCiDQoiLVvjPfvJ1fT8ou0h9g@mail.gmail.com> <4FDC9488.2010509@FreeBSD.org> <20120616145341.GK98264@ithaqua.etoilebsd.net> <4FDCAB02.2040701@FreeBSD.org> <4FDCDA68.9010807@FreeBSD.org> <4FDCEE4A.3020908@infracaninophile.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2012-06-16 22:36, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 16/06/2012 20:11, Olli Hauer wrote: >> With one RPM spec file you can build foo, foo-docs, foo-devlibs and >> foo-examples in one build and get 4 rpm's in one run. >> >> With the ports infrastructure we have to run several builds >> one for foo, one for foo-devlibs and maybe one for foo-docs if docs are >> generated. > > Exactly -- that's precisely the functionality that sub-packages is going > to introduce for the ports. You do one build stage, and can then split > up the results into several different packages. One port, several pkgs. sounds good > > This will require the use of a staging directory, so you can package up > a port without having to have it installed. Staging is another new > feature currently on the drawing board. > >> Also DEPENDENCY handling can become a real mess if a port needs >> foo, foo-devlibs , bar, bar-devlibs ... to build. > > Well, maybe. For an end-user system where you install from pkgs (in > this case, meaning pkgng -- that's the driver for most of these new > features ) you only really need the base 'foo-0.99' package: > dependencies will be pretty much equivalent to what there is now. > Optionall you'll probably want foo--docs and foo--examples too, but you > don't have to have them if installing a really stripped down system. > There will probably be some sort of global setting to say automatically > install docs and/or examples when you install the primary port. > > When you're doing pkg building, then yes, you'ld need to install a bunch > more pkgs -- they'd be BUILD_DEPENDS rather than RUN_DEPENDS -- but the > ports infrastructure should take care of that. Using a package builder > like poudriere to maintain your own pkg repo should become standard > procedure for supporting any reasonably sized installation, and that > will gloss over all the boring detail of that for you. > also sounds good to me, at the moment I stopped testing pkgng since I use exclusive tinderbox with several builds for prod machines and haven't had the time to look deeper into the ./tb tbcleanup bug (tb head) which wiped twice a view builds from two different build machines. http://www.marcuscom.com/pipermail/tinderbox-list/2012-May/002601.html -- Regards, olli
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FDCF8DE.4070702>