Re: Ports/Source Issues
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 07:06:32PM -0500, Steve Price wrote:
> This is essentially what the ports collection does for FreeBSD.
> You can use it to build packages from source and manage packages
> to some extent. What you are talking about (forgive me for
> being a Debian newbie) is putting together an automated .deb
> build tree. You have something similar to this already right?
Well, not really. The non-i386 platforms run scripts to automatically
obtain source packages, unpack them, build them, and compile and upload
the result .deb binary package. They have some how worked out a system
of ensuring that the correct development tools (libraries and header
files etc) are installed, but I don't know how it works.
Otherwise, we have no dependencies for source packages -- there's no way
to know what tools will be needed in advance and no method to automatically
suck them in. It's something that's been talked about off and on for a while
but no implementation has made it to prime-time yet.
> Shouldn't the source package and binary package be separate?
> I mean if I install the source package it doesn't mean other
> packages can use the binaries from it until I've actually
> built and installed what it produces, which is much different
> than me having installed the source for it. Correct?
That's right. The term "source package" isn't entirely accurate, since
they're not managed with dpkg like our binary packages are. When you
build the source, it builds you a .deb, which you need to install with
dpkg. I think this is different from the FreeBSD ports system, which
(IIRC) does not build a .tgz package, it just installs the binaries and
registers the installation with the package manager.
> Has anyone with .deb expertise and a FreeBSD box actually tried
> the port I sent out earlier today? If someone could walk me
Not yet, since I haven't been near my home workstation yet. Later
this evening hopefully.
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB (ex-VK3TYD).
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome.