Jonathan Perkin <jperkin%joyent.com@localhost> writes: > Personally I'd like the default BINPKG_SITES to be removed from > mk/install/bin-install.mk: > > * Users who do not know what's going on are going to be very confused > if they're building for a non-/usr/pkg prefix and end up with the > wrong packages. > > * Unless you have _exactly_ the same mk.conf settings as those used > for the official builds you may run into difficult to diagnose > problems with incompatible dependencies. > > * It slows down builds for regular pbulks while each site is checked, > and may result in packages being pulled in incorrectly. > > * Users who know how to use them correctly and understand all the > risks will be comfortable with adding the sites to their mk.conf > manually. > > Ordinarily I don't have any of these problems as I don't use pkgsrc on > OS that have a default list of BINPKG_SITES, but I've noticed this > recently since performing NetBSD bulk builds, and have had to add > BINPKG_SITES=#empty to all my mk.conf to avoid them. Agreed. I have never used bin-install. I do sometimes wish that installing dependencies would use packages in my own binary package dir, but it never occured to me that pkgsrc by default would go off-machine for packages. Anyone in favor of keeping external paths?
Description: PGP signature