Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:08:39 -0600 (CST) From: "Scott A. Moberly" <smoberly@karamazov.org> To: <hartzell@kestrel.alerce.com> Cc: <pnmurphy@cogeco.ca>, <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: NFS mounting the ports tree. Message-ID: <3812.10.0.0.2.1039133319.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org> In-Reply-To: <3755.10.0.0.2.1039131668.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org> References: <15855.50834.811514.388015@rosebud.alerce.com> <38311.65.221.169.187.1039125234.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org> <15855.52973.469760.370106@rosebud.alerce.com> <20021205183537.767dde5b.pnmurphy@cogeco.ca> <3755.10.0.0.2.1039131668.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:10:53 -0800 >> George Hartzell <hartzell@kestrel.alerce.com> wrote: >> >>> Scott A. Moberly writes: >>> > [...] >>> > > George originally wrote: >>> > > >>> > > 1) I found the section of the freebsd handbook that explains >>> how to >>> > > set up the distfiles directory and the workdirectory. This >>> still seems to require that the client actually build the >>> thing, >>> > > which is what I'm trying to avoid. >>> > > (http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/small-lan.html) >>> > >>> > You can do it, but... /etc/make.conf would have to be generic, >>> use >>> includes based on hostname(1) or manually (script) move >>> > /etc/make.`hostname` around... >>> >>> I'm happy having make.conf be generic, I don't *think* that's the >>> cause of my difficulties. >>> >>> > > 2) I've tried just mounting /usr/ports, cd'ing into the >>> directory of >>> > > interest, and doing a "make install". This fails quickly, >>> since >>> > > the INSTALLCOOKIE is there. >>> > > >>> > > Doing a "make deinstall" then a "make install" works for >>> simple >>> > > ports, but sometimes causes recompilation. >>> > >>> > make clean is a quicker alternative >>> >>> Doesn't a make clean remove all of the stuff that's built? How is >>> that quicker than installing what the big beefy machine has already >>> compiled? >>> >>> > [...] >>> > have /var/db/pkg a temporary mount for building installing. >>> >>> Again, I'm confused. I'm hoping to avoid all of the recompiles? >>> >>> > [...] >>> > I personally just mount and let the client build after I have >>> tested and reviewed said port. >>> >>> In my case, my laptop would spend the weekend rebuilding gnome, >>> evolution, X, perl, etc.... Yikes. >>> >>> > >>> > Hope this helps. >>> > >>> >>> I appreciate the effort, but I still don't have a good way to use my >>> fancy fast cpu to use build stuff from ports for my itty bitty >>> slow-witted machines (I wonder if it's reading this as I type...). >>> >>> g. >>> >>> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >>> with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message >>> >> >> The real problem is that dependencies are "make install"-ed even when >> you do a "make" in the port. Otherwise you could do "make" on the >> server and "make install" on the client. >> >> This has always been a big aggravation for me even it you do "make >> extract". >> >> Maybe a script that parses the dependencies list and does "make >> -DNODEPEND" for each (recursively?) and then "make install" from the >> client. (Sounds tough) >> > That's what mounting /var/db/pkg takes care of... the correct > dependencies are found and thus NOT installed. My mistake /usr/local and /usr/X11R6 also need to be mounted from the slow machine... Sorry 'bout that. -- Scott A. Moberly smoberly@karamazov.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3812.10.0.0.2.1039133319.squirrel>