Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 12:57:00 -0600 From: markham breitbach <markham_breitbach@ssimicro.com> To: freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org Subject: Re: locked packages got upgraded anyway Message-ID: <561EA57C.9010705@ssimicro.com> In-Reply-To: <CAAfFgn6BBWhhpvEbMYdL080oOUtYy4AsrLzyYDTrD5Z7Tx5U=A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAAfFgn6BBWhhpvEbMYdL080oOUtYy4AsrLzyYDTrD5Z7Tx5U=A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Something like a local override list would be great. I am currently in a situation where I am trying to build a sendmail package from ports with the LDAP option enable, but it has a dependency of saslauthd, but that also needs the LDAP option and there is no (simple and obvious) way for me to tell the sendmail package to use my custom saslauthd+LDAP as a dependency. Admittedly I have not spent a great deal of time looking into this yet, as it just came up, nor have I had the time to setup a poudriere repo with all my customizations. -M On 2015-10-14 12:24 PM, vmunix.old@gmail.com wrote: > * Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015, at 17:42, Rainer Duffner wrote: >>>> Am 14.10.2015 um 00:31 schrieb Benjamin Connelly <ben@electricembers= =2Ecoop>: >>>> >>>> We have a few ports we compile with different compile time options t= han the FreeBSD binary repo, so we keep them locked. Last night when doin= g some patching, we saw those locked packages get updated anyhow. For exa= mple, pkg said all of these things on one system: >>>> >>> >>> IMO, you either compile all of the packages you use yourself - or non= e. >>> >>> Until FreeBSD gets a sort of =E2=80=9Estable=E2=80=9C ports-tree that= lives for longer >>> than three months, running your own repo is almost a must for anythin= g >>> even semi mission-critical. >>> >> He has a valid use case and I don't know why it was upgraded. Sounds >> like a bug. Perhaps because it was a dependency? Hmm... >> >> A planned* feature is for a user to be permitted to have packages with= >> custom build options and "pkg upgrade" will handle fetching the requir= ed >> parts of the ports tree and building the updated package so you don't >> have to play this "lock your package, manually upgrade it later" game.= >> Not everyone should be forced to run poudriere just so they can change= >> one option on one package... >> >> * Planned as in "bapt or someone said we should do this when we have >> time" > Are there any plans to introduce sub-packages or "flavors"? Because tha= t > would solve the issue of having to fiddle with Poudriere in order to bu= ild > packages with more options enabled once and for all for probably 99% of= > all users. > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-pkg@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-pkg > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-pkg-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?561EA57C.9010705>