Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:31:36 -0400 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com>, Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>, portmgr@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Arch <arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove @owner and @user from package list Message-ID: <201004120931.36907.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4BC1188F.3060001@freebsd.org> References: <x2j7d6fde3d1004101552u1b60ee9etb8ed15183fc1f26f@mail.gmail.com> <l2z7d6fde3d1004101708o3946d155pfe2f9644daff329c@mail.gmail.com> <4BC1188F.3060001@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 10 April 2010 8:32:15 pm Tim Kientzle wrote: > Garrett Cooper wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Garrett Cooper <yanefbsd@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> When doing some research, it appears that while functionality in > >>> theory exists for @owner and @user in the package list, it isn't > >>> actually used in the pkg_install code at all, adding unnecessary bloat > >>> to package lists; > > > > Doing some more digging, there are a handful of ports that I don't > > have installed that implement this functionality: > > @mode ... > > @owner ... > > @group ... > > I would certainly shed no tears if these went away. > > OTOH, I can see a use for them in pkg_create, to > set the mode/owner/group in the resulting tarball. > This would be good when building a package from a > port while running as non-root user. Yes. I have used this to build 3rd party packages at a previous employer. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201004120931.36907.jhb>