New FreeBSD package system (a.k.a. Daemon Package System (dps))

Dag-Erling Smørgrav des at des.no
Mon May 14 06:34:34 UTC 2007


Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> writes:
> Dag-Erling Smørgrav <des at des.no> writes:
> > Mike Meyer <mwm at mired.org> writes:
> > > How would setting LOCALBASE=/usr break this? Of course, equally valid
> > > is the question "what will break if I set LOCALBASE=/usr"? Hmm. I
> > > think I may found out....
> > For one, man pages for ports will end up in the wrong place (/usr/man
> > instead of /usr/share/man).
> Is this really "broken"? If so, are you sure it's not ports installing
> in ${LOCALBASE}/man instead of ${LOCALBASE}/share/man that's broken?

It doesn't really matter which is right and which is wrong, it's the
inconsistency that is the problem.

> A number of ports seem to depend on the directory tree in ${LOCALBASE}
> existing - ${LOCALBASE}/man/... and ${LOCALBASE}/etc, in
> particular. They use the INSTALL macros to point single files at
> directories, which macro will quite happily create a file with the
> target name if it's not a directory. This creates a number of
> interesting problems later on.

They can correctly assume that the directories exist because we always
run 'mtree -f /etc/mtree/BSD.local.dist -P ${PREFIX}' before installing
a port.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des at des.no


More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list