Re: Shouldn't "make replace" pull in pkgtools/pkg_tarup?

[Aleksey Cheusov <cheusov%tut.by@localhost>]

 >>> At least checkperms and tarup are not necessary, same with
 >>> digest, which is (seems to be) used only when building from
 >>> source.
 >>
 >> Ok. You stated that category 3 can be defined as "packages required for
 >> building from source but not needed for handling binaries". Right?
 >> How about nawk/pdksh/bmake?

> nawk is
...
nawk, bmake and pdksh are required for bulding packages, not for
handling binaries. So, your first try to define category3 failed.

 >> I still don't see a _definition_.
 >> "Not essential" doesn't look fair enough.

> Why do you need this definition?
If I cannot describe thing by one short sentence, this probably
means that this thing is badly designed.

> All seems to be pretty consistent:
> 1. Package management tools.
> 2. Packages.
> 3. Optional helper (infrastructure) packages
> (e.g. for building from the source).
Optional? - yes. Helper? - yes. Infrustructure? - I think no.
Infrustructure packages should be in 1).

I don't understand why pkg_tarup used by 'make replace' is not
in bootstrap. The same for checkperms run from inside pkgsrc.

And I don't like things like BULK_PREREQ.

-- 
Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov.