Subject: Re: Package Views Integration (finally!)
To: Johnny Lam <email@example.com>
From: Greg A. Woods <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/21/2003 13:39:25
[ On Thursday, August 21, 2003 at 00:46:57 (-0700), Johnny Lam wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Package Views Integration (finally!)
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:14:51AM -0400, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> > How are those of us who would very much rather avoid having to deal with
> > a billion symlinks on our systems supposed to avoid this mess being
> > foisted upon us?
> We have an eye toward using hardlinks instead of softlinks to save on
> the inodes usage and to avoid the extra indirection, but that will be
> somewhere in the future. The current implementation and testing has
> been done with softlinks and the initial package views integration
> will be using the softlinks approach.
But I _really_ do not want any kind of links or any kind of "depot"
structure at all.
I want everything installed directly in the final desired location, just
like it is now.
I.e. I really need and want some kind of flag that turns the whole mess
completely off, 100% guaranteed.
Ideally I would also hope it wouldn't ever risk affecting the current
method of installing packages for anyone tracking pkgsrc and not wanting
to use pkgviews at all.
(calling the non-"depot", i.e. current, scheme the "overwrite" method is
a severe misnomer since the package management tools "ensure" there are
no clashes between files)
Greg A. Woods
+1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP RoboHack <email@example.com>
Planix, Inc. <firstname.lastname@example.org> Secrets of the Weird <email@example.com>