2008/6/4 Dan McGee <email@example.com>:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 6:34 AM, Antonio Huete Jimenez
> And how is supposed I can change the prefix for a wide variety of PKGBUILD
> and still have them useable under Archlinux and others???
> I still say that having separate ABS tree don't have any benefit for other
Please try to refrain from top-posting when the quoted email is relevant.
You are asking for two conflicting things, and confusing two
relatively different issues.
Are you using BSD as:
1. A kernel where you want to build the Arch userland around?
2. An existing operating system where you are going to manage a few
packages with pacman?
I was thinking in pacman as a primary package manager for DragonFlyBSD (and possibly other BSD) if the user chooses wants to use as that. For both managing a bunch (or a huge amount) of packages and still being able to compile everything without the need of a separate build machine. BSD will have its own userland as always.
For situation (1), I can see your point- in this case, maybe the Arch
ABS tree should be relatively usable out of the box. But guess what?
Arch isn't BSD, so just because you change the kernel doesn't mean the
package paths change- part of the Arch mindset is not using /usr/local
by default, etc. so changing paths just because you changed to a BSD
kernel would be unjustified.
In BSD base comes with everything (base+kernel) where base are a bunch of programs that shouldn't be overwritten when you install a package with pacman (pacman avoids overwritting but avoids installing too) for fullfilling a dependency.
I know that BSD isn't Linux, of course and I understand your will of not using /usr/local as prefix, but what about using anything you want although we don't do it in my way?
For situation (2), you are dealing with a whole different set of
issues. pacman and makepkg are not pkgsrc replacements, so how could
you expect PKGBUILDs designed for a Linux system and with certain
configure options would work flawlessly on your BSD system? For the
rest of us, this PREFIX option would just make things less KISS and we
wouldn't use it (because it is easier to deal with /usr rather than
I agree with you that things should be kept KISS, but sometimes keeping things so KISS just complicate it if you want to do complex things.
It sounds like I'm ragging and being Mr. Negative here, but you have
to realize this PREFIX thing is *one* small difference in a world of
many between an Arch system and an existing BSD system.
Yup, too many differences but I think we would need to take advantage of all that work done in pacman for being able to compile it under FreeBSD.
It may seem that I have arrived here to your list with a will of changing everything with the only intention of adapting ABS/pacman to BSD environments, but that's away from my real intention.
I just want to help without having any BSD/Linux wars, nothing more
pacman-dev mailing list
pacman-dev mailing list