Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 17:34:11 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman <m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: satisfying package dependencies from installation DVD when building a port -- HOW? Message-ID: <4F622813.2060405@infracaninophile.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <4F6222D1.3070908@unix-beratung.de> References: <4F60C34B.50105@y42.org> <20120314175003.c324d322.freebsd@edvax.de> <4F6222D1.3070908@unix-beratung.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enigDF5C5D1A65CC50FB8F947294
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 15/03/2012 17:11, Robert Urban wrote:
> I seem to have found the "problem". I read somewhere that PKG_PATH sho=
uld have
> the path to the top of the hierarchy, i.e., /cd/packages, and not
> /cd/packages/<something> or /cd/packages/All, because pkg_add was capab=
le of
> adding the hierarchical component, but this is not the case. I find th=
at I must
> set PKG_PATH to /cd/packages/<DIR> or /cd/packages/All in order for it =
to work.
> Also, coming from OpenBSD, I assumed that I could supply pkg_add the "b=
asename"
> of a package, i.e., the name without version number ("p5-Text-Iconv" as=
opposed
> to "p5-Text-Iconv-1.7") but this also does not work. pkg_add apparentl=
y expects
> everything except the ".tbz" extension.
If you look at the packages tree, you'll see a directory called 'Latest'
-- that contains packages named without version numbers. It's not a
perfect one-to-one correspondence with the packages under All: some
packages don't have a 'latest link' (mostly development versions where
there is a production version in the tree as well) or the 'latest link'
isn't the same as the basename of the package, usually because there are
two or more different versions of the same software available.
Also, you should have both .../All and .../Latest on PKG_PATH as
dependency packages are listed with a version number. Yes, it's not
foolproof. The whole package handling thing in FreeBSD is not as good
as it should be. Work is underway to improve that, but it is still
quite a way away from finished.
Cheers,
Matthew
--=20
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
JID: matthew@infracaninophile.co.uk Kent, CT11 9PW
--------------enigDF5C5D1A65CC50FB8F947294
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAk9iKBoACgkQ8Mjk52CukIzkWACcCmTr7Jej2x28WQEbUhQvtWzT
inkAnRLYk1mb3cTTyoeq5SMtOwsKkyWS
=y4u/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enigDF5C5D1A65CC50FB8F947294--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F622813.2060405>