Subject: Re: random comments from a pkg_comp newbie
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <>
From: Greg Troxel <>
List: tech-pkg
Date: 07/08/2004 15:28:57
> >   [x11-links]
> Indeed.  I already removed several "automated installations" during the
> creation of the sandbox... and this can be removed as well.

sounds good.  I'll update tomorrow :-)

> > 
> > UPDATE_TARGET=package
> > DEPENDS_TARGET=package

We'll see if anyone objects...

> $ pkg_comp chroot your_command

Thanks, I just figured that out from reading the source to change it
to run a command instead.  And then I noticed that the man page said
this, but I just didn't see it.

> I always use different binary repos for each configuration.  Which are
> your ideas of "pros and cons"?

Well, it might make sense to share with the native config (in the
native chroot has same bits case).  Then one can pkg_add -u
mismatching packages, etc.  I tend to think (being new I'm not sure)
that such sharing is not a good idea.  But it's the default - perhaps
the default should be to create a different binary repo for each

It's hard to know where there is space.  It might make sense for
maketemplate to take an argument of a dir with lots of space, and
default to putting the binary repo and chroot area there.  (I'm not of
the one-huge-/ persuasion, so all of this in /var doesn't fly.)