Repair pkgng

[Melvyn Sopacua]

Hi,

On Wed, 9 Apr 2014, John Marino wrote:

>> This still doesn't make sense. Distfiles are of no concern to binary
>> packages, so why would I continue to clutter /var/db/pkg with a large
>> tree of directories that is then duplicated to /var/db/ports?
>> What problem in portmaster or the options framework was solved by moving
>> this?
>
> If the portmaster-created "distfiles" bother you, stop using portmaster,
> perhaps?  It seems superfluous to me anyway; I don't get why people feel
> they need it with pkg.

I already did a while back. Yet, it's still the recommended tool in the
handbook if I'm not mistaken. FreeBSD has also always adhered to a
sensible hier(7), which portmaster is now breaking.

>
> IFAIK, options has always been in /var/db/ports, this is not new.  It
> didn't get moved.

Correct. Portmaster moved it's distfiles file.

> I'm not sure what you are trying to achieve with the "what problem was
> solved" line of questioning.  If it were moved, are you trying to get it
> moved back?  What's the goal here?

Yeah. One of the advantages and early implementation goals of pkg(1) was
to reduce clutter in /var/db/pkg.
Secondly, 70-80% of common ports now use an options file (think DOCS,
EXAMPLES, NLS), so the chance that /var/db/ports/portname already exists
is pretty high.

Why then reintroduce files/directories in /var/db/pkg that affect both
port building and deployment? I don't understand what the upside to this
change in portmaster is and thus assume that it solved an issue.

--
Melvyn