Subject: Re: pax and pkgsrc and can someone look at PR pkg/22693?
To: Jeremy C. Reed <email@example.com>
From: grant beattie <grant@NetBSD.org>
Date: 09/24/2003 11:44:12
On Tue, Sep 23, 2003 at 06:39:34PM -0700, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> x11-links needs pax.
> I have heard that pax is essential for pkgsrc. Nevertheless ...
> My system didn't have pax. It has 54 packages installed -- most via
> pkgsrc without any pax.
*lots* of packages use pax, it really is required.
> It might be a good idea to make x11-links have a BUILD_DEPENDS on a pax.
> Any comments?
> I know I mentioned before, but why doesn't pax get registered as a
> package? Why does it have NO_MTREE?
it's required for bootstrapping, though archivers/pax will generally
only be built on an already-bootstrapped system, so this should
probably be addressed.
> And can someone comment on pkg/22693?
> If GNU_PROGRAM_PREFIX is not set or nothing, pax will overwrite tar and
> cpio :(
don't set GNU_PROGRAM_PREFIX to nothing? ;-)
I don't have a clean solution to this at the moment, except for
having the two packages conflict with each other, and I realise this
> (My temp workaround instead of continueing to patch pax, is to use my
what are the advantages of this? (I haven't looked at the pkg)