ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

[Marco Bröder]

On Sat July 16 2011 18:21:12 Chris Rees wrote:
> Bear in mind they should work fine if the port doesn't hardcode absolute
> paths.

Yes, they actually do! Please do not remove them, because they are not as 
buggy as it is claimed here. I often use the -p option for testing of my 
tinderbox -exp packages and it works fine.

A package is basically the same as an installed port - just with some 
additional pkg meta data files all packed into a compressed tarball. If a 
package contains hardcoded paths then the port is buggy not the package or 
pkg_add. It is a general rule that ports should respect ${PREFIX}. If they do 
not those ports need to be fixed.

I find it weird to think the -p / -P options should be removed from pkg_add. 
Do not castrate the tool if some ports are buggy!

Thanks!

-- 
Regards
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20110717/ebbaa2bd/attachment.pgp