Call for comments - pkg_trans

[Miroslav Lachman]

Ivan Voras wrote:
> Doug Barton wrote:
> 
>> You have some very interesting ideas there. Not that I want to 
>> dissuade you in any way from doing this, but I would like to point out 
>> that portmaster already does some of what you're suggesting and it 
>> could fairly easily be modified to do just about all the rest of it. 
>> The two 
> 
> 
> I really want the standard ways of installing and upgrading packages 
> (make install, portinstall) to support those features.

What is your point of view for "standard ways"?
For me, portinstall/portupgrade is not part of the base, so it can be 
hardly more standard than portmaster (or other tools). And as time goes 
by portupgrade has more and more issues with dependencies etc., that I 
am migrating to portmaster... It means - portmaster is my standard way 
of installing, portupgrade is your standard way, but only "make install" 
and pkg_add are official ways included in base.

So... I think there must be "hooks" in ports system and pkg_add itself, 
that any other install / upgrade tool will use it automatically.

Anyway, your proposal is useful. It would be nice to have it in the base 
or in some tool(s) from ports.

Miroslav Lachman