Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:35:37 -0500 From: Paul Murphy <pnmurphy@cogeco.ca> To: freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: hartzell@kestrel.alerce.com (George Hartzell), smoberly@karamazov.org Subject: Re: NFS mounting the ports tree. Message-ID: <20021205183537.767dde5b.pnmurphy@cogeco.ca> In-Reply-To: <15855.52973.469760.370106@rosebud.alerce.com> References: <15855.50834.811514.388015@rosebud.alerce.com> <38311.65.221.169.187.1039125234.squirrel@mail.karamazov.org> <15855.52973.469760.370106@rosebud.alerce.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--=.7)8fR9aLlE8sYl Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:10:53 -0800 George Hartzell <hartzell@kestrel.alerce.com> wrote: > Scott A. Moberly writes: > > [...] > > > George originally wrote: > > > > > > 1) I found the section of the freebsd handbook that explains how to > > > set up the distfiles directory and the workdirectory. This > > > still seems to require that the client actually build the thing, > > > which is what I'm trying to avoid. > > > (http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/small-lan.html) > > > > You can do it, but... /etc/make.conf would have to be generic, use > > includes based on hostname(1) or manually (script) move > > /etc/make.`hostname` around... > > I'm happy having make.conf be generic, I don't *think* that's the > cause of my difficulties. > > > > 2) I've tried just mounting /usr/ports, cd'ing into the directory of > > > interest, and doing a "make install". This fails quickly, since > > > the INSTALLCOOKIE is there. > > > > > > Doing a "make deinstall" then a "make install" works for simple > > > ports, but sometimes causes recompilation. > > > > make clean is a quicker alternative > > Doesn't a make clean remove all of the stuff that's built? How is > that quicker than installing what the big beefy machine has already > compiled? > > > [...] > > have /var/db/pkg a temporary mount for building installing. > > Again, I'm confused. I'm hoping to avoid all of the recompiles? > > > [...] > > I personally just mount and let the client build after I have tested and > > reviewed said port. > > In my case, my laptop would spend the weekend rebuilding gnome, > evolution, X, perl, etc.... Yikes. > > > > > Hope this helps. > > > > I appreciate the effort, but I still don't have a good way to use my > fancy fast cpu to use build stuff from ports for my itty bitty > slow-witted machines (I wonder if it's reading this as I type...). > > g. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message > The real problem is that dependencies are "make install"-ed even when you do a "make" in the port. Otherwise you could do "make" on the server and "make install" on the client. This has always been a big aggravation for me even it you do "make extract". Maybe a script that parses the dependencies list and does "make -DNODEPEND" for each (recursively?) and then "make install" from the client. (Sounds tough) -- Cogeco ergo sum --=.7)8fR9aLlE8sYl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE97+LQTv5Mxsi/WPMRAkPWAKCe69iwssZB4HhBh3MI8SenW6RmXQCgrET6 2nt9Z3+oThRnhdMpiLG/MCk= =AL/W -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=.7)8fR9aLlE8sYl-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021205183537.767dde5b.pnmurphy>