[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: [HEADS UP] packages not supporting destdir
Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost> writes:
> These two
> | cvsup-16.1.hnb2
> | cvsup-gui-16.1.hnb3
> require this one
> | ezm3-1.2nb2
> (which itself is useful for nothing other than building cvsup as I
> understand it), and so there's no point working on them if ezm3 isn't
> fixed first (if ezm3 were removed, cvsup would be unbuildable anyway.)
> In any case, all of this looks as if it is simply incompatible with
> destdir builds, and so incompatible that the people who distribute the
> software just tell you not to bother trying.
> I really don't want to see these go, I use cvsup (the gui not often, so
> that small part of it is less important) and for that, I need ezm3 (or
> perhaps some other modula3 compiler) to build it (for now, exm3 is the only
> one I know of in pkgsrc).
> What's more, I don't use destdir builds, and have no plans on ever doing so.
> I build in a pkg_comp sandbox, which has more or less the same results
> (binary packages get built without affecting the real system, then the
> binary package can be installed). That's pretty much what destdir is
> doing, though at greater cost, and with more advantages - and could be
> really a better solution really, especially if pkg_comp were made able to
> null mount the system filesystems (/usr etc) rather than needing to
> unpack release sets.
> So, even if these never get fixed, please don't remove them, just make them
> marked as broken if someone attempts a destdir build of one of them.
> For those of us who don't care about destdir, that's fine, for those who
> want to use destdir builds, if they ever want one of these packages (and
> perhaps any of the others you mentioned) they can look into fixing them
> (if that's possible for ezm3, or otherwise perhaps look at what would be
> required to make cm3, or something, work).
I fail to see why it is so important to enforce staged installation if
we have pkg_comp and there're people using it. You're not alone.
And I don't really understand why you, me, any user wanting Haskell,
Courier IMAP, or perhaps some other software should modify pkgsrc tree
in order to continue using software that isn't broken.
I still want to hear any sensible reason why packages that don't support
staged installation are broken. In particular, I want to hear explanation
why it should be so important, if USE_DESTDIR=yes doesn't protect user
home directory, and thus one has to use pkg_comp for more security.
Main Index |
Thread Index |