Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:05:05 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for comments - pkg_trans Message-ID: <g6sgqk$mcm$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <489144B5.4030101@FreeBSD.org> References: <g6res0$giq$1@ger.gmane.org> <489144B5.4030101@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigCC9A1F75B2713C76EC4A5D4E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Doug Barton wrote: > You have some very interesting ideas there. Not that I want to dissuade= =20 > you in any way from doing this, but I would like to point out that=20 > portmaster already does some of what you're suggesting and it could=20 > fairly easily be modified to do just about all the rest of it. The two = I really want the standard ways of installing and upgrading packages=20 (make install, portinstall) to support those features. > In terms of the rest of your proposal, off the top of my head the=20 > transaction IDs should probably be saved in /var/db/ports. I need to=20 > think harder about what format .... you could probably have a=20 > /var/db/ports/trans/ and then save the logs of the transactions as=20 > individual files by transaction ID. The wheels are spinning in my mind = I don't think this is a big problem. I have an idea how to record this da= ta. > right now about how this could get hairy down the road when you install= =20 > a bunch of stuff as dependencies for fooport, then you start doing=20 > upgrades on the individual dependencies the log of the transaction=20 > quickly becomes less valuable. Some thought would have to be given to=20 > exactly what the goals are, how long those logs should be valid/useful,= =20 > etc. Yes, rolling back old transactions, after individual packages in them=20 have been updated will be a problem. I see a way out of it if only=20 portupgrade is used for the upgrading so information exists about which=20 package is upgraded by which. --------------enigCC9A1F75B2713C76EC4A5D4E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFIkcaSldnAQVacBcgRApaDAKCUUpkHiJXICWGGx05Yw+JrDJ5/CgCfWta4 9HCUeOio6Oa7uYAEvbm9XW0= =Yh2X -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigCC9A1F75B2713C76EC4A5D4E--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?g6sgqk$mcm$1>