Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:34:56 -0700 From: David Newman <dnewman@networktest.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Using pkg with build options Message-ID: <5330C120.40905@networktest.com> In-Reply-To: <20140323185258.e389040f.freebsd@edvax.de> References: <372190939.49499.1395582789284.JavaMail.mail@webmail12> <20140323150144.029c571e.freebsd@edvax.de> <532F15D8.10403@FreeBSD.org> <20140323185258.e389040f.freebsd@edvax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3/23/14, 10:52 AM, Polytropon wrote: > On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 17:11:52 +0000, Matthew Seaman wrote: >> On 23/03/2014 14:01, Polytropon wrote: >>> On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:53:09 +0000 (UTC), Darrell Betts wrote: >>>> Currently have FreeBSD 9.2 installed. I would like to start using pkg >>>> install but I can't find how to use it with build options like the old >>>> make install clean method. Can anyone share a light on this? >>> >>> Basically, you cannot do this. The new pkg obsoletes the >>> traditional pkg_* tools which operate on binary packages >>> which get built (by FreeBSD build systems) using the >>> corresponding port's default settings. >>> >>> If you need to use custom-configured packages (build via >>> "make install clean" or using a port management tool >>> such as portmaster), this does currently not integrate >>> that well with pkg. However, "poudriere" is a solution: >>> You build packages with your own options and can _then_ >>> use that package source with pkg. >>> >>> Here's a summary: https://wiki.freebsd.org/PkgPrimer >> >> Err... what? > > I didn't write anything that contradicts to your or > Warren's reply. :-) > > The conversion from pkg_* to pkg (pkgng) is easy as > you did describe it. > > > >> Once pkgng-ized, the experience with installing from ports is basically >> exactly the same as with pkg_tools. ie. it does some stuff behind the >> scenes to register packages in the package database on installation, but >> you never have to worry about it or invoke it directly. > > The ports infrastructure will interact with pkg in > the same way as it did with the pkg_* tools (for > example keeping the package database, even though > it's a different database). Additional management > tools (like portmaster) also keep working the same > way. I'm still quite confused over the migration to pkg. I have a mix of 9.2 and 10.0 machines. Most run at least one port compiled with options. Is there a guide to moving these machines to pkg and poudriere? Thanks! dn > > > >> You can twiddle port options to your heart's content and pkg will be >> perfectly happy. >> >> The difference comes when you want to look at the contents of your >> package database. 'pkg info -fa' shows you somewhat more than the >> pkg_info equivalent, including what OPTIONS settings were used to >> compile each package. > > In my (limited) experience, problems can arise when > a port has been compiled with nonstandard options, > or a port has been installed that doesn't have a > corresponding binary package available from the > default package source; in this case, using pkg to > binarily update the installed applications will > (corretly) error. > > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5330C120.40905>