From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 17 07:45:42 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643F516A4B3; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (storm.FreeBSD.org.uk [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFA2543FB1; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 07:45:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (Ugrondar@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.FreeBSD.org.uk (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h8HEjai7083309; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:45:36 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from Ugrondar@localhost)h8HEjZVY083308; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:45:36 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) X-Authentication-Warning: storm.FreeBSD.org.uk: Ugrondar set sender to mark@grondar.org using -f Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])h8HEjrh6065898; Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:45:53 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) From: Mark Murray Message-Id: <200309171445.h8HEjrh6065898@grimreaper.grondar.org> To: Paul Richards In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:39:19 BST." <1063802358.33631.44.camel@localhost> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:45:53 +0100 Sender: mark@grondar.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,FROM_NO_LOWER,IN_REP_TO, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: ports@freebsd.org cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Base packaging X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 14:45:42 -0000 Paul Richards writes: > I've got a prototype setup that packages the base tree. It turned out to > be very simple. It needs a lot more polishing and testing but it looks > like this can definitely be made to work with just some tidying up and > re-arranging of our existing make files. I've succesfully created > packages of /sbin by adding the following to /usr/src/sbin/Makefile > > -- > PORTNAME= FreeBSD-sbin > PORTVERSION= 1.0 > COMMENT=sbin > CATEGORIES=misc > -- ... etc. This is excellent! However, I suspect that a marginally better place to use these would be in the "make distribute" target that "make release" uses. This way, the files are already separated out into directory structures, and it may be easier to build complex pkg-plist's with find(1). ALSO, it may be easier to make more fine-grained packages (DISTRIBUTION=foo) with this. M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH