From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 18 22:22:29 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294D11065670 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 22:22:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dougb@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49458FC15 for ; Tue, 18 May 2010 22:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 3937 invoked by uid 399); 18 May 2010 22:22:27 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO ?192.168.0.145?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@127.0.0.1) by localhost with ESMTPAM; 18 May 2010 22:22:27 -0000 X-Originating-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us Message-ID: <4BF31322.60208@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 15:22:26 -0700 From: Doug Barton Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Anonymous References: <86hbm5yjjh.fsf@gmail.com> <20100518115611.GA45921@atarininja.org> <4BF28470.2050903@infracaninophile.co.uk> <86hbm5vycg.fsf@gmail.com> <20100518195725.GB48168@atarininja.org> <4BF2F6AD.3020709@FreeBSD.org> <20100518203610.GA50328@atarininja.org> <86d3wsub3u.fsf@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <86d3wsub3u.fsf@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Wesley Shields , freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: preferred place for system-wide config files X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 22:22:29 -0000 On 5/18/2010 2:57 PM, Anonymous wrote: > Wesley Shields writes: > >> On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 01:21:01PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >>> In the world where PREFIX and LOCALBASE are different, PREFIX cannot be >>> relied on to exist after the port is installed. Therefore regarding >>> configuration files that are not installed by the port the thing >>> installed (for example portmaster) should look for its configuration >>> files in LOCALBASE. >> >> Yes, I agree with this. > > This is ambiguous. Why PREFIX persistence is relevant here when we're > talking about one port and not about collaboration of several ports? There are 2 possible circumstances. One is that PREFIX == LOCALBASE, the other is that they are not the same. In the case where they are the same (which is far and away the most common) then everything works. In the case where they are different one cannot guarantee that the directory referred to by PREFIX will continue to exist after the port is installed. In the case where they are different PREFIX by its very nature is ephemeral, and LOCALBASE, again, by definition, is "the local system." One could potentially imagine a scenario where installing a port temporarily into a custom PREFIX is desirable, but the user would still want to get settings and configuration from "the system," which is defined to be LOCALBASE. One could also imagine a system on which there is a LOCALBASE and lots of little PREFIXes, each of which is designed to be an autonomous semi-system of its own. In that case you would want a tool (like portmaster) to look for its configuration files in PREFIX. However, this last example is what we refer to as "an extreme corner case," which is to say it is not something for which we ought to optimize, and is potentially not even something for which we would want to make provisions. Fortunately, portmaster (which is what you initially inquired about in your PR) already has a facility for dealing with this, the ~/.portmasterrc file. You can of course also maintain your desired change to portmaster's behavior as a local patch. Either way, the answer to your question, "What SHOULD portmaster be doing?" is "Exactly what it is already doing." I'm sorry if you don't like the answer, but continuing to discuss it is not going to change it. hope this helps, Doug -- ... and that's just a little bit of history repeating. -- Propellerheads Improve the effectiveness of your Internet presence with a domain name makeover! http://SupersetSolutions.com/