On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 02:49:31PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > On 10/20/14 14:43, Baptiste Daroussin wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 02:33:20PM -0400, Nikolai Lifanov wrote: > >> On 10/20/14 13:36, Rainer Duffner wrote: > >>> > >>>> Am 20.10.2014 um 10:19 schrieb David Chisnall <thera...@freebsd.org>: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I presume that most of the relevant differences are for users / > >>>> developers and not sysadmins? It's worth noting that GNU coreutils, > >>>> tar, bash, and a load of other things are in the ports repository. I > >>>> wonder if it's worth having a gnu-userland metaport, perhaps with > >>>> something like the Solaris approach of sticking them all in a different > >>>> tree so that you can just add that to the start of your PATH and have > >>>> all of the GNU tools work by default. > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> They use chef. > >>> The chef omnibus installer assumes there is a /bin/bash. Even the FreeBSD > >>> version of it. Well, it least it did the last time I looked. Maybe this > >>> got fixed in the meantime. > >>> Which means that to „bootstrap“ a node, you’ve first got to install pkg > >>> on it, install bash, symlink it to /bin/bash and then bootstrap the node. > >>> Which kind of runs against the concept of doing everything via chef. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> Hi from sysutils/ansible maintainer! > >> > >> The ansible port REINPLACE_CMDs away hardcoded paths at build time. This > >> way managing FreeBSD "just works". Maybe chef can benefit from the same > >> approach? > >> > > USES=shebangfix is there exactly for that. > > > > I USES=shebangfix, but it only fixes ~40% of path problems (although in > a very neat and easy to use way). Hardcoded etcdir, module directory, > man pages, etc. also need to be changed. > Yes that is the job of the maintainer, so bugging the chef maintainer is the right thing to do.
Maintaining a port meaning making sure it workds properly the FreeBSD way. regards, Bapt
pgpxbmoHXW7px.pgp
Description: PGP signature
