Re: pkg_tarup inclusion in pkg_create

[Julio Merino <jmmv%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On 1/4/12 3:40 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> 
> Martin Husemann <martin%duskware.de@localhost> writes:
> 
>> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 01:04:21PM +0100, Benny Siegert wrote:
>>> Good point. +1 for integration into pkg_create from me. The counter 
>>> argument boils down to "you should not use it", but then again, nobody is 
>>> forced to.
>>
>> Well, I was not trying to push in that direction ;-)
>> In the debugging case it is fine to fix make replace to just skip the
>> tar step if pkg_tarup is not available, IMHO.
> 
> Perhaps this is hard - but why can't 'make replace' simply add a build
> dependency on pkg_tarup?  It seems there are already dependencies on
> digest and pkg_install.

Because you don't know if "make replace" will be used once you do "make
extract".  Consider "make install" followed by "make replace".  All
dependencies have already been built by "make install", and running
"make replace" won't trigger the installation of pkg_tarup.

(My feeling is that the functionality of pkg_tarup sounds like a pretty
useful function and it should be in pkg_install.)

> Also, I think it's better for make replace to error out if pkg_tarup is
> not present; one just builds it manually and then continues.

That's the case already, isn't it?  I've done "make replace" many times
to only realize that I didn't have pkg_tarup, so I went ahead, installed
the package, and attempted the replace again.

-- 
Julio Merino / @jmmv