Subject: Re: Alternatives system, 2nd round
To: Julio M. Merino Vidal <email@example.com>
From: Todd Vierling <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/21/2005 14:51:43
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005, Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> - I've placed the package under pkgtools, but I'm a bit doubtful.
> Maybe sysutils is a better place?
pkgtools. Its main purpose is the support of pkgsrc, as it's unlikely
that users will also create alternative wrappers by hand.
> - Should alternatives.mk be moved inside the package's directory
> instead of living in mk/?
Probably belongs in mk/ given that this will become a decently widespread
> - I have to add a way so that bulk builds do not generate any of the
> wrappers. Why? Suppose you install a single python implementation
> and the 'python' wrapper is generated. Then, while building other
> packages, it might happen that they find the wrapper instead of the
> real program (thus causing inconsistencies - expecting one version
> but finding a different one - during the build).
Bulk builds remove non-dependency packages with pkg_delete before building
each package. So, as long as pkg_delete can do something useful, or the
fallback logic works correctly, all should be fine.
And we certainly want binpkgs generated by bulk builds to generate
alternatives on pkg_add. 8-)
-- Todd Vierling <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>