Re: [RFC] Add usr/ports to BSD.usr.mtree

From: Xin LI (delphij_at_frontfree.net)
Date: 07/29/05

  • Next message: Ronnel P. Maglasang: "booting gbde-encrypted filesystem" 
    Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 12:24:44 +0800
To: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de>

    Hi, Joerg,

    On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 06:07:32PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 11:52:34PM +0800, Xin LI wrote:
    > > It seems that /usr/ports is not part of our BSD.usr.mtree tree. Is
    > > there any reason for this? I'm willing to add it to the mtree if
    > > nobody objects.
    >
    > (a) Not everybody uses third party build infrastructures.
    > (b) Not everybody uses ports, some use pkgsrc.
    > (c) Why should ports be placed in /usr/ports? On my systems it normally
    > was under /home, allowing /usr to be much smaller.

    Thanks for sharing your viewpoints. Mine is a bit different:
     - Not everyone wants to build the system, especially the large companies
       that utilize some sort of binary update mechainsm.
     - Having an empty /usr/ports does not block the user from using pkgsrc
       or others, and it is possible to use ln(1) if the mtree entry is marked
       "nochange". Also, the default setting is to use /usr/ports as PORTSDIR.

    My points to have /usr/ports in the mtree is for convience that users
    creating a jail that is intended to mount the ports tree from the host
    system, without having to create their own in every instances. What
    do you think about this?

    Cheers, 

    -- 
Xin LI <delphij frontfree net>	http://www.delphij.net/
See complete headers for GPG key and other information.

  • Next message: Ronnel P. Maglasang: "booting gbde-encrypted filesystem"

    Relevant Pages