Subject: Re: "make install" owerwrites files without asking
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Joerg Sonnenberger <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/29/2005 15:33:24
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 03:21:14PM +0200, Antoine Reilles wrote:
> On Jun 29, 2005, at 3:04 PM, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 02:49:56PM +0200, Geert Hendrickx wrote:
> >>A solution for this could be based on FAKE installs, like OpenBSD
> >>have. The packages own "make install" is done to a temporary
> >>then a package is created, and this package is pkg_add'ed on the
> >>(in NetBSD make package needs a make install first, which is
> >>not desirable).
> >I'll be implementing that soon.
> This looks like the way darwinports do installs package. They use the
> destroot functionality packages using autotools support, to install
> the package in a fake root directory under work.
destroot or DESTDIR? The latter is supported by automake 1.3+ (?).
It is also supported by a lot of software which doesn't use automake,
e.g. most imake generated Makefiles. It's the most common mechanism
to achieve it. A fallback option which often works too, is to redefine
the PREFIX, but that breaks for obvious reasons when the PREFIX is
wired into the executable.
> It is very easy then to
> check if PLIST is respected, to compress manpages, or check all
> manpages are installed in the correct directory ( PKGDIR/man or
> PKGDIR/share/man ).
And a whole lot of other checks possible. It means that pkg_filecheck
is far less needed and a good base for implementing reference counting
on directories. Marc did a lot in that area in OpenBSD over the last
> Also this make possible (maybe not always) to do
> the full build including make install under normal user rights, and
> use root user only for pkgsrc stuff: moving/copying files, setting
> rights, and so on.
Often, but not always. Still missing is a way to change ownership of
individual files or specify mode bits more explicitly. That would need
some integration with pkg_create.
The only thing root privs are needed for would be installation of actual
packages. IMO that's a huge pro.
BTW, this leads to another question. Would there be interest in rewriting
the pkg_tools to use e.g. libarchive? It would make e.g. pkg_add fully
self-contained and can allow various optimisations currently not possible.