[GSoC2011][STATUS-UPDATE]Add support for FreeBSD package format, RPM and Debian packages(if time allows) to pkgsrc

[Anton Panev <antonpanev87%gmail.com@localhost>]

Hi,

What is done (in repo):

- changed "flavor" to "pkgformat"

- changed "FLAVOR" to "PKG_FORMAT"

- tested the above with several packages in pkg format

- created RPM package: (b)make PKG_FORMAT=rpm package

NOTES:�

In bsd.pkg.mk I added the following to make sure that the rpm tool is installed:

.if defined(PKG_FORMAT) && !empty(PKG_FORMAT) && (${PKG_FORMAT} == "rpm")

. include "../../misc/rpm/buildlink3.mk"

.endif

I'm not sure that is the best way to do it.

Maybe this can be achieved in pkgsrc/mk/pkgformats(flavors)/rpm/pkgformat(flavor)-vars.mk?

About Packager field in the rpm specfile, I'm writing: pkgsrc <tech-pkg%netbsd.org@localhost>

About Prefix field in the rpm specfile: now it's /usr/pkg (LOCALBASE)

Installing rpm package:

show list of package files(I suggest to use different LOCALBASE and PKG_DBDIR ):

# /usr/pkg/bin/rpm -ql 9e-1.0-0

/usr/pkg/bin/9e � � � � � -> /usr/pkg/rpm/bin or /usr/rpm/bin

/var/db/pkg/9e-1.0/+CONTENTS �-> /var/db/pkg/rpm or /var/db/rpm

rpm package name is formed as:${PKGBASE}-${PKGVERSION}.${MACHINE_ARCH}${PKG_SUFX}

I hope that ${MACHINE_ARCH} is safe to use.

tarup: I'm not sure if these targets are aplicable to rpm packages

_pkgformat-check-conflicts: I don't think this is needed

_pkgformat-check-installed: I don't think this is needed

_pkgformat-register: I don't think this is needed

package-install: not ready

_pkgformat-deinstall: not ready

_pkgformat-install-dependencies: is this target responsible for building

packages from dependencies?

Can you recommend some packages to use for testing?

Best Regards,

Anton Panev.