Picking up on the conversation archived here:https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-pkg/2013/04/10/msg011065.htmlAleksey Cheusov wrote: we [pkgsrc] should provide yum repository for RHEL, zypper repos for SLES, apt repositories for Debian derivatives etc.I agree with the above rather strongly -- pkgsrc should not be "all or nothing". It offers a far superior way to build packages on most OSes, but there is no justification for it replacing the native package-managers. Myself a happy user of FreeBSD ports, I'm now tasked with setting up package-building for Ubuntu and would much rather use pkgsrc, than anything Ubuntu/Debian offer. But the resulting packages, however I build them, must be installable on a generic Ubuntu system, playing well with the packages installed through other channels. "Real" admin won't learn new package managers. It is not just that -- these days packages are installed/upgraded on systems via tools like Ansible and Puppet... Because the packages we need to build are (for now) small and simple, I may be able to just convert the pkgsrc-produced .tgz files into .deb ones -- using either my own scripts or epm, as Aleksey suggested 4 years ago. But I do wish, that pkgsrc should offered a way to build native packages officially -- indeed, that should be the default mode... Obviously we should _not_ use /usr as a prefix for many reason.This is the part I do not consider "obvious" at all. But, as long as the prefix remains configurable, there is no need to agree on the single location... Yours, -mi |