Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-19 Thread Lowell Gilbert
Baptiste Daroussin writes: > On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:41:31 +, Dieter BSD wrote: >>> 1.  Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, >>> for >>> example? >> >> Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose. >> > > Corrupting the pkgdb there is a chroot option for that You would ne

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-19 Thread Baptiste Daroussin
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 18:41:31 +, Dieter BSD wrote: 1.  Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, for example? Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose. Corrupting the pkgdb there is a chroot option for that Another is to test a new version of a package without messi

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-19 Thread Dieter BSD
>> 1. Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, for >> example? > > Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose. Whoops, it occurs to me that using -P to populate a chroot/jail would only work for simple cases. There is the -C option, but it "needs to be a fairly complete file sy

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-19 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
On 07/19/2011 01:41 PM, Dieter BSD wrote: 1. Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, for example? Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose. Another is to test a new version of a package without messing up the existing version. I don't see how these two goals are compat

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-19 Thread Dieter BSD
> 1.  Spell out very clearly its purpose - is it to populate a jail, for > example? Populating a chroot/jail is one purpose. Another is to test a new version of a package without messing up the existing version. There are bound to be other reasons. Compiling the port rather than installing a pa

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-17 Thread Chris Rees
On 17 July 2011 11:55, Marco Bröder wrote: > On Sat July 16 2011 18:21:12 Chris Rees wrote: >> Bear in mind they should work fine if the port doesn't hardcode absolute >> paths. > > Yes, they actually do! Please do not remove them, because they are not as > buggy as it is claimed here. I often use

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-17 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
current -> ports On 07/16/2011 09:02 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: Unless say, you're doing package installation outside of a chroot/jail, to populate something inside a chroot/jail before you start said chroot/jail. I can see "-P" and "-p" working for those many ports which just put programs in p

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-17 Thread Marco Bröder
On Sat July 16 2011 18:21:12 Chris Rees wrote: > Bear in mind they should work fine if the port doesn't hardcode absolute > paths. Yes, they actually do! Please do not remove them, because they are not as buggy as it is claimed here. I often use the -p option for testing of my tinderbox -exp pac

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-16 Thread Chris Rees
On 16 Jul 2011 17:18, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" wrote: > > current@ to ports@ again. (Sorry, my mistake.) > > > On 07/16/2011 11:10 AM, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> >> On 16 Jul 2011 17:04, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" > > wrote: >> > >> > On 07/16/2011 10:53 AM, Chris Re

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
current@ to ports@ again. (Sorry, my mistake.) On 07/16/2011 11:10 AM, Chris Rees wrote: On 16 Jul 2011 17:04, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" mailto:step...@missouri.edu>> wrote: > > On 07/16/2011 10:53 AM, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> >> On 16 Jul 2011 16:38, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" mailto:ste

Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-16 Thread Stephen Montgomery-Smith
Replacing current@ with ports@, just like Chris did. On 07/16/2011 10:53 AM, Chris Rees wrote: On 16 Jul 2011 16:38, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" mailto:step...@missouri.edu>> wrote: > > On 07/16/2011 04:26 AM, Stefan Bethke wrote: >> >> Am 16.07.2011 um 04:43 schrieb Stephen Montgomery-Smith

Fwd: Re: ports/158179: some packages do not fully honor -P dir option in pkg_add(1)

2011-07-16 Thread Chris Rees
Taking out current@ and replacing with ports@ On 16 Jul 2011 16:38, "Stephen Montgomery-Smith" wrote: > > On 07/16/2011 04:26 AM, Stefan Bethke wrote: >> >> Am 16.07.2011 um 04:43 schrieb Stephen Montgomery-Smith: >> >>> I was looking through the source code of pkg_add. Personally I don't see ho