Subject: Re: pkg/10835: Package upgrade procedure sucks
To: David Brownlee <email@example.com>
From: Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/17/2000 09:41:59
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, David Brownlee wrote:
> > > For those who have the disk space and time to burn, how about
> > > an option to build everything in a chroot'ed environment,
> > > including making binary packages. The upgrade pass could then be
> > > a 'pkg_delete ...', followed by 'pkg_add ...'. Note - this would
> > > be an option...
> > Upgrading via binary packages is not an option, but mandatory.
> > Or do we hand out compiled versions of the OS as an option next?
Of course, we do hand out compiled versions of the OS... :-)
> I'm suggesting an alternative way for 'make update' to work, not
> removing any of the existing functionality.
> It would be nice to extend this option to normal builds also,
> but still as an option.
It's a neat idea. It would be especially suitable for bulk builder
machines, as for any machine that builds packages for other hosts.
And, we already have packages that install differently using source
vs. binary--in fact, almost anything with an INSTALL script.