unionfs limitations?

[George Hartzell]

Marc G. Fournier writes:
 > On Sat, 7 May 2005, Eirik [ISO-8859-1] Øverby wrote:
 > 
 > > On 07-05-05 03:19, "George Hartzell" <hartzell at kestrel.alerce.com> wrote:
 > >[...]
 > >> Here's one unionfs/jail gotcha that's bitten me a couple of times.  If
 > >> you actually *use* (or, have used) the ports directory to build and
 > >> install stuff onto the "host" machine, the ports infrastructure in the
 > >> jail gets kind of confused.  It seems to be checking for the files in
 > >> the dependencies, doesn't find them, goes to make them, and then
 > >> [depending on what state the relevant port directory is in], things
 > >> get "odd".
 > >
 > > I noticed that pretty early on, yea ;)
 > 
 > Has 5.x *really* gone that far downhill? :(

That particular problem isn't a 5.x thing *at all*, it's just a
consequence of the way ports work (recording some info as dot files in
the work directory) and dependencies are tracked (looking for files
out in /usr/local).  As soon as I thought about it, it was clear what
*I'd* done.

 > I've been doing the above since about day one ... *but* ... is this the 
 > case if you set WRKDIRPREFIX= to somewhere else in /etc/make.conf?  I 
 > don't build the actual port *in* /usr/ports, so the only thing that gets 
 > written in /usr/ports is /usr/ports/distfiles ...

I think that having the work directories to something else would have
avoided the problem quite nicely.

Again, it's not a FreeBSD 5 isse at all, just me getting exactly what
I asked for....

g.