Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 12:49:17 -0500 From: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@FreeBSD.org> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ports-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/print/cups-lpr Makefile pkg-deinstall pkg-install pkg-message Message-ID: <200311241749.hAOHnHrW013628@green.bikeshed.org> In-Reply-To: Message from "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> <20031124173656.GA27782@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 05:20:13PM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > On (2003/11/21 16:18), Pav Lucistnik wrote: > > > > > FreeBSD ports repository > > > > > > Modified files: > > > print/cups-lpr Makefile > > > Added files: > > > print/cups-lpr pkg-deinstall pkg-install pkg-message > > > Log: > > > - Move lpr binaries in base away, so cups binaries in /usr/local/bin > > > get picked. > > > - Move them back on deinstall. > > > > This is only a partial solution; the next "make world" will blow away > > these binaries. > > > > Also, if I'm using the binary updater package, it'll have a cow on the > > next lpr update. > > > > I really think you should be leaving this up to the sysadmin, > > documenting the list of files that should be removed, and recommending > > the use of NO_LPR=yes in /etc/make.conf. > > Seconded, this is a *horrible* thing to do. Please back this out. > Ports should not mess with the base system unless the administrator > *specifically* asks for it. A knob in the style of *_OVERWRITE_BASE > is probably appropriate. A better solution is having a separate CUPS prefix for lpr which can be added to an individual's path based on his or her preferences. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200311241749.hAOHnHrW013628>