Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 11:35:06 +0100 From: David Demelier <demelier.david@gmail.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Question: /usr/sbin/pkg vs /usr/local/sbin/pkg in 9.1 Message-ID: <50DC245A.7020002@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <50DC1CC5.30402@FreeBSD.org> References: <20121227104451.6fc6bfed@suse3> <50DC1CC5.30402@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 27/12/2012 11:02, Matthew Seaman wrote: > On 27/12/2012 09:44, Rainer Duffner wrote: >> as I see it, pkgng is actually included in 9.1 as /usr/sbin/pkg, right? > > /usr/sbin/pkg and /usr/local/sbin/pkg are very different. > > /usr/local/sbin/pkg is a binary package management system. > > /usr/sbin/pkg is a shim that can bootstrap the installation of > /usr/local/sbin/pkg if it is not already installed, or that invokes > /usr/local/sbin/pkg preserving the rest of the command line otherwise. > >> Is there a way to say "I have the pkg tool in base already"? > > pkgng is not in base and there are no plans to import it. If you are > going to use pkgng then you need to install it, either from ports or by > using the /usr/sbin/pkg shim to install from a pkgng package. > Why there is no plan to import it? >> Or is the pkg in base supposed to just install the pkgng from ports? > > Indirectly. /usr/sbin/pkg installs from a pre-compiled tarball, which > is generated from the ports-mgmt/pkg port. > > Cheers, > > Matthew > Cheers, David
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50DC245A.7020002>