Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:44:05 +0200 From: Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com> To: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/add Makefile add.h extract.c futil.c main.c perform.c pkg_add.1 src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/create Makefile create.h main.c perform.c pkg_create.1 pl.c src/usr.sbin/pkg_install/delete Makefile delete.h main.c perform.c ... Message-ID: <A8B65A06-EBB5-11D8-887A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> In-Reply-To: <20040811162405.GV87690@submonkey.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ceri Davies wrote: > On Wed, Aug 11, 2004 at 04:16:24PM +0000, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: >> eik 2004-08-11 16:16:24 UTC >> >> >> - replace the perl version of pkg_version(1) by its C equivalent, >> which means that `pkg_version -c' does no longer work > > I don't think that this should have gone into RELENG_4, in this case. Maybe. I don't know whether I should have asked re@ first, the MFC was announced in the commit log and `pkg_version -c' is stupid anyway, so I doubt anyone uses it. When you insist I can provide a shell script providing the same functionality or add it to the C version. The problem with the package tools is that they are strongly tied with the ports tree, which is the same on -CURRENT and -STABLE, and the new features are really worth the MFC. And the C version is much faster than the perl one. Anyway, how do you think we should proceed from here? -Oliver
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?A8B65A06-EBB5-11D8-887A-00039312D914>