c.kworr at gmail.com
Tue Jul 22 14:59:17 UTC 2008
David Southwell wrote:
>>>>> 2. There is another question on similar lines because some packages
>>>>> helpfully show the hierarchy in the ports tree etc:
>>>>> rather than simply
>>>> Why 'devel/'? There's no confidence that thees packages have their
>>>> corresponding ports.
>>> I do not think you read carefully.
>>> Some packages are reported for example as:
>>> - devel/p5-Devel-Symdump (bsdpan-Devel-Symdump-2.08)
>>> others as
>>> - (bsdpan-DB_File-1.817)
>>> In other words some show the BSDPAN package location in the port
>>> hierarchy others do not. The former method seems more useful.
>> There's some misunderstanding here... Packages are not ports. In your
>> example we have ' - [<port name>] (<package name>)' syntax, but this
>> doesn't state that any <port name> installs <package name>. Just try it
>> yourself - the package name when build from the ports would be
>> 'p5-Devel-Symdump-2.0800'. This explicitly states that your installed
>> package wasn't built from ports, but have a proper port to be
>> installed/upgraded/replaced with. As for other lines ports system fail
>> to identify corresponding ports.
> Let us be careful here.. the fact that they appear in the ports hierarchy
> means they get referred to as ports.
Nope. Most of em' won't appear in ports anyway. Not all modules from
CPAN have correspondent FreeBSD ports. This way when such an orphan
package is installed bsdpan creates a proper package entry.
And one more thing, they are referred _to_ ports, not referred _to as_
> The intention seems to be to maintain
> consistency with the rest of the "ports system". It may be a bit of a kludge
> but it needs to be systematic if it is going to be easily understood. The
> reason I have drawn attention to a few of the inconsistebncies is because the
> lack of consistency makes it difficult to understand, explain and manage.
I agree with you. That's why I personally would avoid at all possibility
installing anything (as packages or bunch of files) if there's no such
port in the tree.
>>>> Please note that bsdpan-* is not a port name or part of it. It's the
>>>> name of installed package.
>>> I do not agree. BSDPAN is the name that is used by and referred to in
>>> freebsd documentation as the system by which cpan ports are incorporated
>>> into the frebsd ports tree. The package are the ports. bsdpan is not
>>> the name of a port.
>> *Curios*. Citacion needed. Quick search through the handbook gives me
>> nothing on 'bsdpan' at all. There's nothing on official site either
>> except: "BSDPAN, a collection of modules that provides tighter
>> integration of Perl into the FreeBSD Ports Collection, has been added."
>> in 5.0 relnotes. Again packages are not ports, they are really different
> Like I said trying to make perl modules constent with the ports system.
You are free to go. Submitting patches would be the fastest way around.
>>>> I'm not a perl junkie. Try hitting CPAN instead.
>>>>> 5. # locate bsdpan brings a list of bsdpan packages in /var/db/pkg but
>>>>> no other files documentation etc.
>>>> True. See 3.
>>>>> 7 If something does exist could it be incorporated into the ports tree
>>>>> e.g ports/BSDPAN_README for holding general guidelines about using the
>>>>> BSDPAN and covering such issues as advice about holding packages etc.
>>>> Not by me, really. Try to invetigate this and write it down then propose
>>>> it for inclusion.
>>>>> 9. Would not a current index of BSDPAN ports e.g ports/BSDPAN_INDEX
>>>>> including a short description also be useful?
>>>> Reply hazy. Ports ain't really the correct place for this staff. Try
>>>> hitting CPAN.
>>> freebsd ports may not have an equivalent for all items listed in cpan. I
>>> am thinking of simply an index which list the bsdpan path/portname
>>> showing the equivalent cpan port names & versions, This file could be
>>> updated whenever a bsdpan port is committed and maintained in the same
>>> way as ports/ UPDATING.
>> I think this way we result in local equivalent of 'grep "^p5-"
> This does not deal with discrepancies between versions as list in freebsd
> ports index and cpan index... Things are not that simple.
Try yelling at port maintainers. Most CPAN ports in tree are named like
correspondent bsdpan packages. If some are not - only the maintainer can
give you a clue why would that happen.
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
More information about the freebsd-ports