pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

proposal: remove pkg_tarup from make replace

Joerg Sonnenberger <> writes:

> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 11:05:56AM +0200, Benny Siegert wrote:
>> Would it be possible to have „make package-install“ just use the -u
>> option to pkg_add? This would do the right thing in this case. The
>> param is harmless if no older version is installed.
> That's effectively what make replace did for a long time, until some
> people insisted that pkg_tarup must be run again.

(Ignoring the fact that having package-install behave like replace if a
package is installed and what replace should do are separate issues.)

I'm not sure who "some people" are, or when this was.  My memory is that
when I first became aware of make replace (2004? 2005?), it was calling
pkg_tarup, and the point was to have a binary package of the previous
package so that one could roll back if the new build/install failed.

Now, with DESTDIR, the old package is not removed until a binary package
of the new version has been successfully created.

So, I think the pkg_tarup has outlived its usefulness, and we should
just unconditionally drop the pkg_tarup line.  Or given that we are
close to freeze, comment it out, and say on 11/1 if no issues remove the
line and the associated undo-replace targets.

Note that one can run pkg_tarup manually, or run a script that creates
binary packages for all installed packages that don't have them, etc.

Does anyone who uses make replace find the current pkg_tarup invocation
useful, and if so would be they be troubled by removing it?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index