Alex Dupre wrote:
Alexander Leidinger ha scritto:
To achieve this goal we have 2 possibilities, either we install
everything into LINUXBASE and install a wrapper in LOCALBASE, or we
install everything in a safe location in LOCALBASE. The first part
requires that the maintainers of the linux program play some tricks in
their port (plist and/or Makfile). If they fail to do this, it
increases the load of portmgr from time to time (build failures on the
build cluster). In the second case (install into a safe place in
LOCALBASE), portmgr is out of the loop, as if something goes wrong,
the port maintainer and/or emulation@ is asked for help, as it is a
bug of the port.
I admit that probably I'm using only one or two linux applications and
I've never created a linux port, but I think the right way is the former
possibility, the latter seems a hack to me. It could be harder for
unexperienced maintainers, but once we defined the correct way to add a
wrapper in LOCALBASE (and put it in the porter's handbook), I think the
work for maintainers/committers should be quite easy. What are the other
issues that make the former solution so difficult?
Are you saying that adding a wrapper to every single linux app is the
right way to go? And just putting things in their defined spots (as
you've been doing since yoiu began using Unix, sticking libs in /usr/lib
and executablees in /usr/bin, and addons in the same spots in
/usr/local) is wrong? I am saying, you have a new exec type, stick
those in their new spots, then they all run without any wrappers, just
working as things have been working since unix began.
I guess I might be wrong, but I have to say, wrapping everything really
does seem to me to be the hack.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
