Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 13:55:59 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> Cc: Kirill Ponomarew <krion@voodoo.oberon.net> Subject: Re: HEADS UP: pkg-plist strict enforcement starting Message-ID: <20050114215559.GA71927@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20050114211206.GF1175@k7.mavetju> References: <20050113062739.GA28658@xor.obsecurity.org> <Pine.LNX.4.44.0501131148520.25402-100000@pancho> <20050113180504.GA26064@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050114130404.250d6e26@apircalabu.dsd.ro> <20050114112918.GF69532@voodoo.oberon.net> <20050114211206.GF1175@k7.mavetju>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Jan 15, 2005 at 08:12:06AM +1100, Edwin Groothuis wrote: > On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 12:29:18PM +0100, Kirill Ponomarew wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 01:04:04PM +0200, Adi Pircalabu wrote: > > > > I'm going to be careful about not allowing the "questionable" packa= ges > > > > to fall foul of the pkg-plist checking, until we decide one way or = the > > > > other whether they should be considered "broken". > > >=20 > > > This is a tricky situation from my point of view. I'm following this > > > thread with a lot of interest since I'll be managing a port which CAN > > > NOT honor pkg-plist strict checking. Here are few details: > > >=20 > > > - The configuration files are created and heavily modified at install > > > time from .dist files, will be modified as needed and should not be > > > deleted at uninstall - the configuration should be kept for a later > > > upgrade. This will definitely break "make install deinstall" on the > > > packages cluster, but the files are required since they must contain > > > information about various modules and plugins of the port, and this > > > information must be written through a daemon started at post-install. > >=20 > > You can try cmp(1) in pkg-plist to compare configurations files. > > Take a look at ports collection, there are enough examples. >=20 > Maybe we need two additional @ commands for pkg-plist: >=20 > - @dirrmifempty foo/bar > does do what "@unexec rmdir %D/foo/bar 2>/dev/null || true" does. >=20 > - @rmifdifferent foo/bar foo/baz > does do what "@unexec cmp %D/foo/bar %D/foo/baz && rm %D/foo/bar" doe= s. >=20 > This way we >=20 > - have an easy and consistent syntax for a difficult command >=20 > - have less chance for errors (forgetting %D, && instead of ||) >=20 > Comments? This keeps getting suggested under various names, but you need to solve the compatibility problem. Kris --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFB6D/uWry0BWjoQKURAtWEAJ9hj9yy3Y9YI20ZLLFCATI2xgiObACg/g/5 2l6oNQz18d/wbR7Q1vp/UZs= =EDza -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0F1p//8PRICkK4MW--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050114215559.GA71927>